{"response":{"docs":[{"id":"aru_unequal_1852","title":"Vote for Amendment 3","collection_id":"aru_unequal","collection_title":"Land of (Unequal) Opportunity: Documenting the Civil Rights Struggle in Arkansas","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["Political brochure supporting the Arkansas Marriage Amendment (Amendment 3) which defined marriage as being between a man and a woman.","Civil Rights -- Homophobia -- Gay Rights -- Discrimination -- Little Rock -- Pulaski"],"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":["Fayetteville, Ark. : University of Arkansas Libraries"],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":null,"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--Arkansas","Civil rights--Arkansas","Race discrimination--Arkansas","Segregation--Arkansas"],"dcterms_title":["Vote for Amendment 3"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. Libraries"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://digitalcollections.uark.edu/cdm/ref/collection/Civilrights/id/1852"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Please contact Special Collections for information on copyright."],"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"vhs_crmva_vote","title":"Voting rights","collection_id":"vhs_crmva","collection_title":"Civil Rights Movement in Virginia : An Exhibition on Display February 7 - June 19, 2004","dcterms_contributor":["Library of Congress"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Virginia, 37.54812, -77.44675"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["Section of online exhibit focusing on African American voting in Virginia in the twentieth century and the efforts of African Americans to gain the right to vote, culminating in the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The page contains one black-and-white photograph and one poster from the Virginia Historical Society and the Library of Congress.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of: The Civil Rights movement in Virginia (Virginia Historical Society)"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Civil Rights Movement in Virginia Collection (Virginia Historical Society)"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--Segregation--Virginia","Civil rights movements--Virginia","African Americans--Civil rights--Virginia","Voter registration--Virginia","Voting--Virginia"],"dcterms_title":["Voting rights"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage","Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Virginia Historical Society"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://virginiahistory.org/learn/historical-book/chapter/voting-rights"],"dcterms_temporal":["1901/1965"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["black-and-white photographs","posters","online exhibitions"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"vhs_crmva_naacp","title":"W. E. B. Du Bois and the NAACP","collection_id":"vhs_crmva","collection_title":"Civil Rights Movement in Virginia : An Exhibition on Display February 7 - June 19, 2004","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Virginia, 37.54812, -77.44675"],"dcterms_creator":["Library of Virginia"],"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["Section of online exhibit outlining the growth of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and the role of W. E. B. Du Bois in its development. Covers the 1938 lawsuit against the city of Norfolk, Virginia, alleging inequality in pay between white and African American teachers. The page includes four black-and-white photographs and one newspaper article from the Virginia Historical Society and the Library of Virginia.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of: The Civil Rights movement in Virginia (Virginia Historical Society)"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Civil Rights Movement in Virginia Collection (Virginia Historical Society)"],"dcterms_subject":["National Association for the Advancement of Colored People","African Americans--Segregation--Virginia","Civil rights movements--Virginia","African Americans--Civil rights--Virginia","African American civil rights workers--Virginia","Civil rights workers--Virginia","Norfolk (Va.)--Trials, litigation, etc."],"dcterms_title":["W. E. B. Du Bois and the NAACP"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage","Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Virginia Historical Society"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://virginiahistory.org/learn/historical-book/chapter/w-e-b-du-bois-and-naacp"],"dcterms_temporal":["1901/1963"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["black-and-white photographs","newspapers","online exhibitions"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"vhs_crmva_wjc","title":"The world of Jim Crow","collection_id":"vhs_crmva","collection_title":"Civil Rights Movement in Virginia : An Exhibition on Display February 7 - June 19, 2004","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Virginia, 37.54812, -77.44675"],"dcterms_creator":["Richmond Times-Dispatch"],"dc_date":["2004"],"dcterms_description":["Section of online exhibit explaining \"Jim Crow\", the legal and social racial separation that was the norm in Virginia and much of the South before the Civil Rights movement. The page includes two black-and-white photographs and digital images of an African American figurine and a Ku Klux Klan robe from the Virginia Historical Society and the Richmond Times-Dispatch.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata."],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of: The Civil Rights movement in Virginia (Virginia Historical Society)"],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Civil Rights Movement in Virginia Collection (Virginia Historical Society)"],"dcterms_subject":["African Americans--Segregation--Virginia","Civil rights movements--Virginia","African Americans--Civil rights--Virginia"],"dcterms_title":["The world of Jim Crow"],"dcterms_type":["StillImage","Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Virginia Historical Society"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://virginiahistory.org/learn/historical-book/chapter/world-jim-crow"],"dcterms_temporal":["1901/1959"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["black-and-white photographs","online exhibitions","figurines","robes (main garments)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"aar_wsfa_26","title":"WSFA audiovisual item E0001.023","collection_id":"aar_wsfa","collection_title":"WSFA Collection","dcterms_contributor":["WSFA-TV (Television station : Montgomery, Ala.)"],"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Alabama, 32.75041, -86.75026"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2004/2006"],"dcterms_description":["Opening graphics aired on WSFA from 2004 to 2006. The following segments and programs are included: \"Hey Leslie, What's Cooking?\"; \"Cooking With Gas\"; \"Mr. Food\"; \"Food for Thought\"; \"Families First\"; \"Instructions Not Included\"; \"Dr. Simon Says\"; \"Parenting\"; \"Power of Faith\" ; \"On Call\"; \"Medical Matters\"; \"Crimestoppers\"; \"Picture of the Week\"; \"Does It Work\"; \"County Road 12\"; \"Education Report\"; \"First at 5:00\"; \"Traffic\"; \"Sports Drill\"; \"Sunday Night Low Lites\"; \"First Weather\"; \"Team Report\"; \"WSFA 12 News Special Report\"; \"Top Story\"; \"WSFA 12 News Breaking News\"; \"WSFA 12 News / Tonight at 10:00\"; \"WSFA 12 News / Today at 5:00\"; \"WSFA 12 News Today In Alabama\"; \"Spring Into Fitness\"; \"Today In Alabama: To Go\"; \"Streets of Speed\"; \"Out of the Mouths of Babes\"; \"Hagood Time\"; \"Sniper Trial\"; \"Holiday Greetings from Alabama Soldiers / Brought to you by Larry Puckett Chevrolet / WSFA 12\"; \"Pet Vet\"; \"Around the World\"; \"Breaking News\"; \"Team 12\"; \"Whatever Happened To . . . ?\"; \"Beauty Makeover\"; \"Consumer Action Line\"; \"What's Going Around?\"; \"Developing Story\"; \"New At 6:00\"; \"New At 10:00\"; \"Only On 12\"; \"County By County\"; \"Beyond Alabama\"; \"Gas Watch\"; \"Today In Alabama: Today In Alabama Builds a Home\"; \"Cooking With Today In Alabama\"; \"Batter Up / Montgomery Biscuits\"; \"Opening Day / Biscuits Baseball\"; \"Team Coverage / Montgomery Biscuits Baseball\"; \"Play Ball / Montgomery Biscuits\"; \"Friends\" episode.; \"Hot Shots / Capitol Filmworks Image Center\"; \"Health Action Line\"; \"Decision 2004\"; \"Around Alabama\"; \"Summer Food Drive\"; \"Fresh From the Garden\"; \"The Buzz\"; \"Exploring Alabama with Bob Howell\"; \"Next At 6:00\"; \"Consumer Watch\"; \"Olympic Spirit\"; \"Today In Alabama: Olympic Spirit\"; \"WSFA 12 News / After the Olympics\"; \"WSFA 12 News / Hurricane Disaster Relief Drive\"; \"Friday Night Fever\"; \"Hurricane Frances\"; \"WSFA 12 News / Hurricane Update\"; \"Hurricane Ivan\"; \"Fighting the Flu\"; \"Jeff Do My Job\"; \"Song Of The Day / Mix 103\"; \"Trivia Challenge / Mix 103\"; \"Investigates; \"12 Steps to Fitness / Gold's Gym\"; \"Celebrating 50 Years / Sports Anchors\"; \"President Bush Visit\"; \"Storm Team 12\"; \"Inside Hyundai\"; \"Hyundai Grand Opening\"; \"Tropical Storm Arlene\"; \"Hurricane Arlene\"; \"Tropical Storm Dennis\"; \"Hurricane Dennis\"; \"WSFA 12 On Tour\"; \"Search for Natalee\"; \"Today In Alabama: Coffee Club / Royal Cup Coffee\"; \"Biscuits Baseball / Ultimate Fan\"; \"Tropical Storm Katrina\"; \"Hurricane Katrina\"; \"WSFA 12 Disaster Relief Drive\"; \"Hurricane Rita\"; \"Hurricane Katrina: The Aftermath\"; \"Rita's Wrath\"; \"Decision 2006\"; \"Tropical Storm Tammy\"; \"Hurricane Wilma\"; \"Remembering Rosa Parks\"; \"Black History Month\"; \"Severe Winter Weather\"; \"Meth Menace\"; and \"WSFA 12 News Live.\"","YouTube link: https://youtu.be/LDd0DkQgU7s"],"dc_format":["video/mp4"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["WSFA collection","Box E0001, Item 023"],"dcterms_subject":["Television industry"],"dcterms_title":["WSFA audiovisual item E0001.023"],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Alabama. Department of Archives and History"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://digital.archives.alabama.gov/cdm/ref/collection/wsfa/id/26"],"dcterms_temporal":["2000/2009"],"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Copyright, Alabama Department of Archives and History. Donated by WSFA, https://www.wsfa.com."],"dcterms_medium":["videocassettes"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1440","title":"\"2003-04 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District,\" Office of Desegregation and Monitoring","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)"],"dc_date":["2003-12-16"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","School districts--Arkansas--Pulaski County","Office of Desegregation Monitoring (Little Rock, Ark.)","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational law and legislation","Educational statistics","School enrollment","School improvement programs","School integration","School management and organization","Magnet schools"],"dcterms_title":["\"2003-04 Enrollment and Racial Balance in the Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District,\" Office of Desegregation and Monitoring"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1440"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["Available for use in research, teaching, and private study. Any other use requires permission from the Butler Center."],"dcterms_medium":["reports"],"dcterms_extent":["24 pages"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"nge_ngen_c-b-king-1923-1988","title":"C. B. King (1923-1988)","collection_id":"nge_ngen","collection_title":"New Georgia Encyclopedia","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Dougherty County, Albany, 31.57851, -84.15574"],"dcterms_creator":["Lawson, Mary Sterner"],"dc_date":["2003-12-09"],"dcterms_description":["Encyclopedia article about C. B. King, a prominent African American lawyer during the civil rights struggle in southwest Georgia. King attended Fisk University in Nashville, Tennessee and the law school at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. King practiced law for many years in his hometown of Albany, Georgia.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata.","GSE identifier: SS8H11"],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dcterms_subject":["African American political activists--Georgia","Race discrimination--Georgia","Georgia--Race relations","Civil rights movements--Georgia","Georgia--History--20th century","Civil rights--Georgia","Civil rights workers--Georgia","African Americans--Civil rights--Georgia","African American lawyers--Georgia","Georgia--Race relations--History--20th century"],"dcterms_title":["C. B. King (1923-1988)"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["New Georgia Encyclopedia (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/history-archaeology/c-b-king-1923-1988/"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["If you wish to use content from the NGE site for commercial use, publication, or any purpose other than fair use as defined by law, you must request and receive written permission from the NGE. Such requests may be directed to: Permissions/NGE, University of Georgia Press, 330 Research Drive, Athens, GA 30602."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Cite as: \"C. B. King (1923-1988),\" New Georgia Encyclopedia. Retrieved [date]: http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org."],"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["articles"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":["King, C. B. (Chevene Bowers), 1923-1988"],"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"geh_vhpohr_386","title":"Oral history interview of William M. Alexander, Jr.","collection_id":"geh_vhpohr","collection_title":"Veterans History Project: Oral History Interviews","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["Belgium, Wallonia, Liège Province, Arrondissement de Verviers, Saint-Vith, Saint-Vith, 50.28407, 6.12728","Belgium, Wallonia, Luxembourg Province, Arrondissement de Bastogne, Bastogne, 50.00347, 5.71844","France, Maginot Line, 49.4112748, 6.0834938","France, Metz, 49.1196964, 6.1763552","Germany, Saarbrücken, 49.234362, 6.996379","Germany, Saarland, 49.4173988, 6.9805789","Moselle River, 49.0207259, 6.53803517035795","Netherlands, Rhine River, 51.97198, 5.91545","United Kingdom, England, 52.355518, -1.17432","United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","United States, Georgia, Chattahoochee County, Fort Benning, 32.35237, -84.96882","United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Fort McPherson, 33.70733, -84.43354","United States, Kentucky, Hardin County, Fort Knox, 37.89113, -85.96363"],"dcterms_creator":["Eberhard, Sarah","Alexander, William Murray, Jr., 1924-2009"],"dc_date":["2003-12-03"],"dcterms_description":["In this interview, William Alexander describes his experiences in a U.S. Army infantry unit in Europe during World War II. He relates his experiences in training, and discusses the Army Specialized Training Program (ASTP). He participated in the Battle of the Bulge, was wounded and evacuated to England. He relates conditions in the encampment, travel on the Autobahn and the progress of the battle. He recounts communications with his family and his post-war life.","William Alexander was an infantryman in Europe during World War II.","BILL ALEXANDER VETERANS HISTORY INTERVIEW Atlanta History Center December 3, 2003 Interviewer: Sara Everhart Transcriber: Stephanie McKinnell Sara Everhart: My name is Sara Everhart, interviewing Bill Alexander on December 3, 2003, regarding his experiences in World War II. What we would like to start off with is just prior to going into the service, were you in school, were you working, you know, at what point in your life were you when things got started. Bill Alexander: I was a freshman at the University of Georgia. I spent one year there before I was drafted. My intention was to get into the armored specialized training program, which a college program for people going in the army, but to start with, you had to go through the basic training. So I was drafted and went through the basic training, which is the training that all ground forces have to go through where you learn to crawl under machine and shoot rifles and big guns and that sort. I was actually assigned to a armored basic training, I learned tank driving, tank tactics, and that sort of thing. The most significant part of my experience was later on in combat in Europe I was in the .Bbattle of the Bulge, and of course that was a real fantastic battle and quite a few hardships and that sort of thing, but I'll lead up to that, to how I got to that particular point. Since I had applied for this armored specialized which they called ASTP, there were a lot of them in my basic training unit that had applied for it and also some had applied for OCS. In our files, we were segregated; our IQ was a little bit higher than the average in order to qualify for those particular programs. So in the files, we were sort of segregated a little bit different, so when we finished basic training… SE: Where was your basic training? BA: Fort Knox, Kentucky. When we finished basic training, everyone was to be sent out as replacement as other tank outfits, but those of us who had been set up for ASTP and OCS were not sent out, but at that point, they had abolished those programs. They anticipated so many casualties in Europe that they wanted all men they could get over there, so they aborted college and that sort of thing. So everybody else in the company was sent out as replacements in nine units but they decided to create a separate tank company for us. This was, they were experimenting with a big heavy tank that the armored school had already turned down and I guess somebody with influence had an interest in it and they wanted to try again to determine that this tank was useful. So they created this separate tank company and those of us that had been designated for college training and OCS were put in that company along with some ________ from the armored school who had been training tank soldiers for years. They were a real specialist. Lot of them had been mechanics in civilian life and were very well trained. So we experimented with that tank for about six months I guess, and we came to the same conclusion that the armored school did, that it wasn't practical in combat, just too big and heavy. So they broke up this company, and by that time, course the ______ who had come from armored school already had high ratings, they were sergeants, master sergeants, that sort of thing, but those of us that had come in had gotten some promotions, too. I was a corporal at that time. And they sent us to the infantry. Now, the ones that was in our basic training unit, they sent them to a tank outfit, but they sent us to the infantry because when they see a bunch of soldiers who had ratings like we did to another outfit, that kind of fills up the rating so this new outfit could not promote some of their people. There was a lot of resentment about us coming in there. They also had people that had washed out in the air force, had been training for air force. They gave them a buck sergeant rating and sent them in there, so they were trying _____ to break us back to private so they would be able to advance these. And a lot of real experienced, high-ranking NCOs were busted to private. My first sergeant showed me an order that he was sending down to have me busted. But before that went through the inspector general got a hold of it and stopped all that. So I wound up going overseas with this infantry unit as a corporal. I hadn't had a lot of infantry training in a learned company; I had infantry training in basic training, but it's not the same thing. They tried, since I had a corporal rating, they had me work as a squad leader at times and so it was an area that I hadn't had a lot of experience so it was a sort of a stressful situation. SE: At what point did you go over, what year was that? BA: It was 1944, October '44. So we got into combat, and it's right ironic, but most of those experienced soldiers from this division that we were in were some of the early casualties, so a lot of those of us who had come into the outfit moved up in rank pretty fast because of the casualties. I became a staff sergeant very quickly and was a squad leader for a long time. Because of more casualties, I wound up being a platoon sergeant. So I had a lot of responsibility without having a lot of the training that most of these people had had. We first went into battle down into southern France around Metz and _____. In fact, we pushed into Germany for a short time there. While we were down there was when the Belgian Bulge broke out. ‘Course we didn't know what it was, we just knew that they were pulling us out of the line and sending us somewhere else. They loaded us in trucks and sent us north and we found out later, of course, that we were going up there to push the Bulge back. We were assigned to Patton's third army. We were near the end, you might say the tail end of the Bulge because we were the unit to push it back. The Bulge had broken out, and most of the damage had been done so we were in the position of pushing it back. The bad thing about that whole thing was the poor intelligence on the part of the U.S. Army. The top generals felt that the Germans didn't have the capacity to do any real damage up there so they had the lines pretty loose up there, didn't have too many troops, and the ones that they had were very green. For example, one of the divisions that was on the line was a brand new division that had just come over from the states. A lot of those were people that had been in this ASTP program and assigned into this division, and they had been, a few weeks earlier, they had been sitting in college classes, and also with new draftees. So you had soldiers that had never been in combat, of course, had had basic training and learned to use the gun but had never been really tested as far as combat even in training. They were spread out very thin along this line. Of course, the Germans were aware of that and they would just push right on through that. So when we came up to push them back, we ran into a lot of those guys that had been, had come in there and gotten in the beginning of the Bulge, and I had talked to a lot of them. Some of them said they were in the classroom just a few weeks before that happened and they got up there and just really didn't know what to do. When the worst thing about that, as far as personnel problems is concerned was the weather. They said it was the coldest winter in many years there, it was down to zero with snow on the ground. This is another problem of the army, they didn't have winter equipment for us, we just had normal shoes and uniforms that we normally wore. We were having to sleep on the ground in that heavy snow. In fact, my feet got frozen, and they weren't bad enough to be evacuated, but whenever I got them warm, for example, if we were on the march and we stopped and went into some houses, when heat hit them, they started aching so bad I had to go back outside. At night I usually had to sleep with my feet out from under the covers because as soon as they would get warm they would ache. The bad part about it was the conditions, the weather and that sort of thing. But then we continued to work and push the Germans on back. I'll give you another example. I was, by that time, I was a squad leader, and we were in a holding position at Luxembourg, and there was a lot of snow on the ground and all. We were in a situation where we were under fire from the Germans during the daytime from artillery on the side of a mountain and we had to stay down in the foxholes. At night we would get up and go over the hill to get our supper, the cooks would bring it up to us and that sort of thing, and we would get a hot meal then and they would give us a ration. We would get a hot breakfast the next morning. We had to do all of this in the dark because as soon as it got light the Germans would be ready to open up on us. So we would, they would give us a, at breakfast time they would give us a K ration to eat for lunch. Then we'd have to go back over the hill and stay in the foxhole all that day until the next night. I had a replacement assigned to my squad and he came up to me and said he'd been in that foxhole one day. He told me, he said sergeant, I'm suffering from asthma and I'm just about to die up in that foxhole. If I'm up there another day I won't be able to survive. He said, can you do anything about it. So I talked to the first sergeant about it and they were able to move him out. Later on, he was sent back behind the lines, and later on he was coming up. No, as he was going back, he ran into some guys from my outfit and he was telling them if it hadn't been for Sgt Alexander I'd be dead now. So you have a lot of situations like that. And again, some of these guys that were sent up there, replacements, had been in this ASTP program and I had one of them tell me that he was given a three-day pass to go home and then shipped overseas from this college classroom. So this was a situation that was going on more. Then there, we finally pushed the Bulge back and the, Patton's army was doing a tremendous job on that and they didn't get much credit for it. The press was talking about General Montgomery from England, giving him credit for most of this, and a lot of that is in this book I have here. So that was generally the situation, mostly the hardship, cold weather, and of course there were casualties. I remember one case, one of the toughest battles we had, we were trying to push the Germans out of a town. They were pushing us back. We were going back and forth. A couple of companies from my battalion had moved out beyond us, and they had the snow for the first time, and they had gotten hold of some sheets and improvised a white uniform. They came back in where we were and we started shooting at them because we had never seen anybody with white uniforms. They were yelling that they were Americans, and Germans were shooting at them from the rear and we were shooting at them from the front. So we had to quiz them and ask them questions about the United States to make sure they were legitimate and got them in. We had, that was about the time the Germans had sent a lot of English speaking Germans with American uniforms over. They disrupted the traffic. They would change signs, _____ signs of that nature. So we heard that there were Germans in American uniforms, so we didn't trust anybody. We had to be very careful. I remember going back and seeing where some of our people had captured some of those Germans that had American uniforms on and they had them sitting up on the hood of a Jeep, and they took the shoes from them in all this cold weather and that sort of thing, they took a lot of the uniform stuff off. That was a thing you just couldn't trust anybody, you just didn't know what the situation was. We had gone into this place that I was just talking about, where we found these people. Before, we had gone in to try to take this town, my company did, and the Germans overwhelmed us, and we lost a lot of people. We went in with a full company of about 140 people and we came out with about 28 people. The rest of them were either wounded or captured, that sort of thing. Then we tried to get orders to retreat to ______ because the Germans were still in there. But the orders came back with anybody that retreated from that would be court-martialed so we had to go back in and fight again. But they did give us a platoon of tanks to go in, and we, although those tanks were knocked out very rapidly, we finally came in and got control of the town. We stayed in that town for a while, then knocked out, knocked the Germans back and forth. SE: Do you remember the name of the town? BA: I want to say it started with an “A” but there was another town close to it, was ______. I've got it in this book. Let's see if I can find it. I can't read it, it's small print. Can you read that? I meant to bring a magnifying glass. That was one of our toughest ones. It was in this thing somewhere, I'm trying to see if I see it. SE: Is this a book that your group printed that or? BA: This is a book about the 87th Infantry Division. It was compiled professionally. SE: It looks like it's beautiful. BA: And it's divided into regiments. So there's a section on my regiment which was the 347th. See this is pictures of captured German prisoners in the snow, and you can see, you get an idea of the weather conditions from this. There's some charts of some of the battle operations. SE: What we may do towards the end is actually have you hold up, hold up some of those to the camera, because… Another person: Was that compiled by the army, the army compiled that book, didn't they? BA: Not the army officially but some group did and of course they sold it to us and we had to pay for it. On the front of it, they've got the route that we took. We landed at La Havre France and then these arrows show where we were going. The first time, our first infantry attack was in this Sarb___ area of southern France, in Metz right here. This was the first time the division was entered in combat, and here's where we crossed the German border. And then arrows turn around, that's when we were going back up to help on the Bulge, and it shows us going up to Bastoigne. You may have heard this, Bastoigne was the town where the 101st Airborne Division was surrounded and almost wiped out there. So this shows our route. After most of the fighting is over, the division, I was wounded by this time and was back in England. The division was sent right on over to Czechoslovakia. So this gives us a little bit of a history of how we were. SE: At what point were you wounded? BA: I was right on the Rhine River. After the worst of the fighting was over. In fact I would get letters from some of my buddies while I was in the hospital and they was telling about how much fun they were having on the autobahns and driving through there and all that stuff. But I was sleeping on clean sheets and so I didn't have any complaints. The first time I had been able to sleep on a nice bed and all that. SE: You want to give a little bit of information about how you were wounded, what led up to it, where you were when you were wounded and… BA: We were on the, we had pushed into the Rhine River one night, and the Germans were trying to get a lot of equipment across the line, so there was a lot of real heavy fighting going on there. But by daytime they had gotten across and there was no more fighting. So we went down to the river there where they had left a lot of their equipment and all that sort of stuff, and we were going through the trucks and all that. Some of the guys were riding motorcycles up and down the road over there, and I was gathering souvenirs when I was wounded, so after all that fighting, I was wounded by collecting souvenirs (COUNTER 289) but a sniper had gotten me from I guess across the river. I was shot in the knee. We called a leg wound a million dollar wound because that meant you'd be evacuated and you wouldn't be sent back because you couldn't fight with a bullet in your leg, so we always looked forward to a wound like that because you'd get to go into a hospital and sleep on clean sheets. I remember one time I had a guy in my squad who was a very malcontent person, just always complaining, and I went to relieve him from outpost duty one time, and he was laying on his back with his leg up in the air like this. I said what are you trying to do, he says I'm sticking my leg up so maybe a German would shoot it and I'd be evacuated. That's the kind of extreme that they would go to. SE: When you were injured, where were you taken? BA: I was taken up to a field hospital there, and they did the preliminary operation I guess. Then I was flown back to England and I was in a general hospital in England until I was able to get out. Then I was in a recuperation center for a while in England. SE: What part of England? BA: You know I don't even know where I was. We got some weekend passes and I went to some of the towns, but I can't… I remember one time I went to Stratford-on-Avon, I was close to that but I'm not familiar really with where I was. I was shot full of luck in my army service. Number one, I was forced to get out of the tank outfit because one thing I saw when I got in combat is those tanks went up in flames and a lot of people were burned and all. You could take care of yourself out on the ground a lot better than you could all cooped up in a tank. So although there was a lot of bad conditions, I'd much prefer to be on the ground in the infantry than being cooped up in that tank. So I felt I was lucky in that standpoint. Then when the, after I was wounded, and that's another thing, getting wounded in the leg which sent me back to the hospital was another stroke of luck. Then with the, when the war was over, the chances are that it would be a quite a while before I got back to the states, but I was assigned to a general hospital unit. I was in limited service. So instead of going back to infantry, I was assigned to this general hospital unit. It was scheduled to ship to the pacific. See the Pacific war was still going on. So I came, ______ the same ship I went over on, which was the Queen Elizabeth. When we docked in New York, they had announced that the Japanese were surrendering. See we were on our way to the Pacific, we was going to ____. They sent us, they sent everybody closest to home for a 30 day furlough before they were shipped to the Pacific. So I was sent to Ft. McPherson, here in Atlanta. The day that I got to Ft. Mac was the day that they celebrated the Japanese surrender. So I was able to walk up and down Peachtree Street with my girlfriend who I later married, and so we enjoyed the celebration with all of that. So that's another lucky streak. If it hadn't been for that, I would have been over in Europe for a long time before I would have gotten discharged. And of course, if it had been a little bit earlier, if the war was still going on, I'd be over fighting in the Pacific, being over there. SE: How was the communication back home? Did you have much opportunity for communication with your family? BA: Yes, that was an interesting thing. I had written a letter to both my mother and my girlfriend to tell them about how I had been wounded. My mother got the letter from me, and I was telling them how fortunate I was and how nice it was to have a nice bed to sleep in, how I was really happy about it. My letter to my mother got to her before she was notified by the war department that I had been wounded. Back then they sent telegrams, Western Union, and the only people they had to deliver telegrams were old men, and she said this old man came up to the door with a telegram and says, Lady I'm sure sorry to bring you this telegram, and she said oh that's alright, I already heard, so I was glad to get it. And he was afraid he was going to get her upset because I had been wounded which she had already heard. The communication was very good. I meant to bring a sample of it. We had what we called V-mail, which we would write the letter and they would microfilm it and reduce it and put in on film and they could ship you know thousands of letters over on one reel of film. Then they would reproduce it when it got over here. So what they would get would be a little bit, a small thing, but at least it was fast communication. I got packages, cakes and cookies, and… My mother knew that my favorite dish was, what did we have to eat today?, Brunswick stew. My memory's getting bad. She canned Brunswick stew and had it shipped to me over there. We were real fortunate for that. I remember that time when we were moving out to go up to push the Bulge back. We got our first mail from home, and I got a fruit cake from my aunt. The officers got a, two bottles of whiskey a month. They had a fifth of gin and a fifth of bourbon, and our lieutenant was a teetotaler. So he had gotten his liquor ration and he had given it to us. We were in this truck. So I passed my fruit cake around and they passed the bourbon around, so we enjoyed that going up to the Bulge. Of course TAPE 1SIDE B COUNTER 000 That was a real experience up there. One of the towns that my, well the only real sizeable town that my company got into was St. Hubert Belgium. And it was, we took this town with my, we had to struggle through snow and all that, it was really a rough situation but the Germans moved out the next day and we didn't have any problems. And so we were resting and glad to be out of combat, having a nice town to relax in, and somebody from the signal corps came in and said they wanted us to put our equipment back on. They wanted to take pictures of us taking the town. And we told them nothing doing, we weren't about to do that. But they went and talked to our company commander and so we got orders to do it, so we had to retake that town for the benefit of the cameras. We stayed in that town for about a week and it was real nice, it was the first time we had had a good place like that to stay. All of Belgium was very friendly, and we enjoyed that quite a bit. Then we had to move out and continue the war. That was, in that area, that's around St. Vith. St. Vith was completely wiped out with artillery fires back and forth from the Americans to the Germans. Then we began to move on back towards Germany and it seemed like we marched from Belgium to Luxembourg all the way to German. Then we, my unit crossed the Mozelle river which is at a point where it almost runs into the Rhine river, and that was a very sticky situation. There's pictures of that in here. There's a steep bank on both sides of that river, so we were, my unit was taking ____ to go on in, and we went, we didn't carry a lot of heavy arms because we anticipated the Germans would open up on us and we'd but out there in the water with a lot of heavy equipment so we went over very lightly in light boats. We got on the other side and without incidence the German's didn't fire on us. Then a group was coming behind us with the heavy equipment and they came in bigger boats and all that, and the Germans were waiting for them and they opened up on them, and they went down, a lot of them drowned because they were carrying heavy equipment and they couldn't maneuver. But my unit held that beach head for a while, a while until they could get more equipment across there. And then we had to fight up that hill. When we got up to the top of that hill, that was about night time, and the fighting had slowed down. We were told we would be taking it easy for a while so we took over a house, our unit did, and so we were enjoying it, they said we wouldn't pull out until the next morning. This was in Germany, and of course, we had been through France and the Germans had just looted France, and we go into a France house and everything was just looted, nothing was there. But in this German house we were staying in, we found a wine cellar down there so we were enjoying t his booze and living it up and then all of the sudden the orders came in that things had changed that we were moving out. So we moved out and fortunate that my unit, my company was in reserve, and two companies went down the hill in the middle of the fighting and we were up on top of the hill. I remember it was drizzling rain and I was under a raincoat with a buddy of mine, and you could hear the shells popping over your head as it went by. He says look up and see where they're firing from and I said I looked up and I said they're firing from everywhere, and he said well pull that raincoat back down, thinking that would protect him. So we spent the night on that hill, fortunately we didn't get hurt up there. And then the next day is when we went down the hill and that was the Rhine river and that's where I got wounded. SE: Did you have, were there friends and family members that were also in the war at that time? BA: Not any immediate family members. I had an older brother who had two children and then he didn't go in. I had a younger brother who went in the Navy, and the war was over by the time he finished boot camp. In fact, he enlisted in the Navy, he dropped out of high school to get in the Navy, because he was afraid the war was going to be over before he got in there, and it was over by the time he finished his boot camp training, and he was assigned to an aircraft carrier, and all they did was to haul troops. They had to go over and pick up the troops and bring them back. He didn't get in any fighting. I had some cousins that were in the Navy in the Pacific, I didn't know much about what they were going and all that, but I didn't have any real close family members there. SE: We talked about the communication, it sounds like the army's communication was a little bit slower than your own mail getting over there. Once you came back here and you were back in Atlanta in your way out, when were you officially discharged? Did you stay in the reserves? BA: Alright, lets see. I got back, Japanese surrender was in August and that's when we landed. When I had a 30 day furlough from that. After that furlough I was, they had to do something with us, so I was assigned to a unit in Fort Oglethorpe which is up near Chattanooga. They just had to find something for us to do until the time to be discharged. You had to accumulate points. When I first went in, was first drafted, they asked if anybody if you could type, and I could, and I passed a typing test. I had given, I was given a rating as a clerk/typist but I never used it until I was getting ready to get out. So when they assigned me to this hospital unit they saw where I had been a, I could be a clerk/typist, so I spent the time typing medical discharges until I accumulated enough points to get out. That was in November I think is when I was actually discharged. So I just killed time you might say up there until that period. SE: Then you went back to Atlanta? BA: Yeah and went back to college. SE: At Georgia? BA: Well I went to the, it was a separate school then, what's now Georgia State, its. No I mean it was not a separate school, it was part of the University of Georgia, it was called Atlanta division of University of Georgia. So I went there for a quarter and then I went over to Athens and got back into it. Course I got in with returning veterans, we were all in the same boat. We were in our army uniforms dyed and that sort of thing and we were all struggling to get along, and everybody was just, anxious to get out of school. It wasn't like your normal college group because everybody was serious and wanted to finish up and get on with their lives because they had matured, I had matured a lot then in that length of time. I probably wouldn't have finished school, college, if I hadn't finished that. Because see it was right at the end of the depression and I was having to work my way through college. Going back it was with the GI bill and the combination of the GI bill and a part time job, I was able to make it alright. SE: When you first went in, you were pursuing the military ___ programs. Did you completely change paths when you went back, in terms of your studies or what you wanted to do? BA: Oh no, I went back and continued what I had planned to do which was to get a degree in accounting. This specialized training thing I was telling you about, that was a way of getting college time while you were in service, and it just didn't work out for me, the timing was wrong on that. A lot of people got a lot of college credit while they were in service. SE: What about, are you involved with going to reunions or staying in touch with any of the people? BA: No. Our division really wasn't anybody that pulled together. That division had been a training division, they brought an old line unit like the 2nd Cavalry and something like that. So people had come and gone through that unit, even before they went overseas, it was a training unit. So you really didn't have anybody that had been in the division for a long time, so nothing was really built up on it. SE: Would you ever go back at any point, or have you ever been back since? BA: No, I would always like to have seen some of its, area that I had been to but I never got over there? SE: Hold up those pictures and try to focus in here. BA: I was reading, oh I've got a lot of clippings I've gotten over the years. This was a series that was in the Atlanta paper, its about World War II fifty years later. And I was reading something about the Bulge and they were saying that we had over 80,000 casualties there in that Bulge. It was the biggest battle that the Americans had been in since Gettysburg I think. Now these are some of the pictures, showing ____ can you focus on that? This is a picture of a couple of soldiers stopping to eat, they're on their way to St. Hugert, that was the town I was telling you about and you see how heavy the snow and all was there. We had to battle through all that to take the town of St. Hugert. Then this just shows some scenes of all the snow and all out there. That's just GI's lounging around. These are some of the battle plans that shows some of the activities of where we were fighting. SE: You actually followed that one there on the left. Was that the one you followed? BA: No, that happens to be another unit, its not mine. Let me see. That's, its another battalion, its not my battalion. These are just some pictures of GI's out there. It doesn't show much snow there but it was awful cold at that point. ?? … foxhole with the snow over the top of it. BA: Yeah I'll do that. This is where we went through the Sigfried line. That was dragon teeth. Here's another picture of the Sigfried line, that's where we first went into Germany. That's where we crossed the Mozelle river, that I was telling you about before and the tanks finally got across. Now here's some of the boats I was telling you about that we went across on. See guys had all this heavy equipment and boats were sunk and a lot of them were drowned, course they couldn't swim with all that equipment. Then after we got across, we began pulling a bridge together and you could bring the heavy equipment across on this bridge. Engineers would come up and put that bridge together? ?? Pontoon bridge? BA: Yeah. Another place where we had to battle up a hill. That's what most of this is, various pictures like this. SE: On the right there… BA: Oh that's some, that's _______ Germany and that shows what happens in a lot of those towns. The artillery had been blasting through there both with Germans shooting towards us and us shooting towards the German just about like that town there. I thought maybe that was St. Vivre. They have a picture here of St. Vivre which was just completely obliterated, let me see if I can find it. Here's a picture of eating out on the field. St. Vivre is back the other way. Yeah, here's the ruins of St. Vivre. That was a pretty good sized town. But as you can see, there's not a house standing. I remember one of the ____ I talked to had told me about going through St. Vivre, she said there's not one brick standing on top of the other, they're all completely liberated. I can't stand up too long, I got a pain in the back. SE: Were there others, I know you said these clippings were from the Atlanta Journal Constitution and that was on, when was that, did that series run? BA: That was in 1995. See that was 50 years after the war. This particular one here is about Patton and it tells a lot about the Bulge. “Patton said that since January, the 3rd Army has ____ 6,484 square miles from the enemy captured 140,000 or wounded an additional 99,000. History records no greater achievement in so limited a time. The defending Germans flee and panic in front of the armored forces of Patton and the 1st Armored commanded by Lt. Gen. Hodges. GI's were the first Americans to cross the Rhine. The two US armies streaked across the open plains of middle Germany, gobbling up massive industrial centers as they go. The retreat becomes a rout as Nazi troops cannot turn tail and run fast enough. German roads leading to Munich and Nurenberg are carved with fleeing civilians. Thousands of Nazi troops rush to the American lines to be captured.” In other words, they were wanting to be captured by Americans. “A jubilant General Eisenhower, supreme commander, said that the main German defense line has been broken and that as a military force on the rest of the front, they are a whipped army. There will be no negotiated unconditional surrender but an imposed unconditional surrender.” I was trying to pick out something there. “In the American press, General Marshall complained there was overdose of Montgomery [talking about British General Montgomery, they gave him a lot more credit than they did the Americans]. So on March 23, Ike telephoned and directed that I owed a press conference to emphasize American achievement. Both General Hodges and General Patton had crossed the Rhine before Montgomery's grandiose operation plan to go as scheduled the following day. Montgomery's massive assault across the Rhine is launched at 1:00 AM March the 24th among the more than 250,000 troops at his command are the British and Canadians.” The press had given Montgomery a lot more credit for crossing the line, and he wasn't the first one to cross. The Americans were already across. “Patton's ___ seized the German city of Frankfurt on March 26th, and cut the Stuttgart-Hanover highway. The 1st armored drives into Lindberg and clears it quickly.” That's what that's generally about. Then there's a story here about a bridge leading across the Rhine that the German's were desperately trying to blow up and it wouldn't blow up. They set a lot of charges on it, and it never did fall. And so the American's were able to use that bridge to cross, that's the way they were able to get across. That's real interesting to go back and read this but it… SE: Those were some very good stories. Did you have any other ___ or things… BA: I don't think so. These is divided by regiment. I'm going to show you a picture of my company if I can find it. A right interesting thing, I was home on that 30 day furlough I was telling you about, and I wasn't in my original unit, I was in this, I had been assigned this general hospital unit. But my unit had been sent back to the states, and they were stationed down at Ft. Benning. I happened to run into some of them down at a nightclub in Atlanta and take some of them right from my company. So they was telling me about being down at Ft. Benning and invited me to come down there. So I went down there the next day and I just happened to be there when they took a picture of the company, and I was no longer a member of that company, I got my picture taken with them, that's me right there. SE: [Inaudible] BA: That's what the whole company looks like. SE: I'd like to reference the book itself on this tape, I know. I don't know if there's a…. It's called the, what's the title? [COUNTER 298] BA: See it says here this book is respectfully dedicated to the officers and men of the 87th Infantry Division who gave their lives so that we may live. I thought maybe it would say who produced it, but it doesn't. SE: What about the ____. Just going to see if you have anything else in particular you'd like to add? Go ahead and just wrap things up. Have you thought about that you forgot to say earlier? Another person: I remember a story that he used to tell about at the Bulge where he used to have to sleep in the foxhole with the shelter half over the top and a snow on top. The snow actually insulated the… BA: When we moved up to the Bulge, we got into the first snow, me and a buddy built a real good foxhole, and we had built a fire, it was real cold, during the daytime, and we'd built a fire down in there. As it came on close to night, course we had to put the fire out, and it was warm ashes there. And we'd put a shelter half over those ashes and we'd lace the top of the foxhole with logs. Generally we did that in case an artillery shell came in and exploded in the air, it wouldn't rain shrapnel down on us. So, that made a top for this and I put a shelter half down on that to kind of seal it in. So we were down in that hole with the warm ashes and it snowed and completely covered all of that over with snow. I was called out about 2 o'clock in the morning to go on guard duty and I had to come out of that nice warm hole in that cold. I always said that was the nicest foxhole I ever built. I couldn't stay there very long. And then the next day we had to move out, had to keep pushing that Bulge back. Oh we saw lots and lots of German equipment as we pushed them back, trucks and tanks that had been bombed and all that. And horses. See the German's didn't have much gasoline so they used horses to pull a lot of their guns and all that sort of stuff. And we'd see dead horses laying around and all that. And we would occasionally see dead Germans. The Americans always tried to keep the dead Americans cleaned up because they didn't want us to see dead Americans. And they have a unit called graves registration group that go around and pick up the dead American soldiers as fast as they come. I remember one time, I had to run into a place where they were accumulating the dead American soldiers, and there must have been fifty of them that were just stacked up there. And the usually keep that hidden from the soldiers but I had to run in there. That's a sickening feeling to see your own men lined up like that. We got used to seeing dead Germans and didn't think much about it. If you've got a couple of minutes I can give you… SE: Yeah, actually we do. BA: I had one time, when I had been evacuated for a short time because I had a cold and my temperature was over 100. I came back up to the lines and I was snuggling down and we were in the Magino Line and there were places to sleep and all that. I had bedded down there and somebody came in looking for me. And they said somebody said Sgt. Alexander's back and they said yeah, he's around here somewhere. And I just snuggled down, I didn't want them to pull me out because I'd been out of combat for about a week and I wasn't ready to go back. He said the lieutenant wants him to take a patrol out. So he found me and they dug me out and I had to take a patrol out that night and drive us to go up in the German lines and contact a unit on our right which was not part of our division, it was another division, so we made the contact. They had had breakfast in the dark and they had pancakes. We always tried to get our cooks to cook pancakes and they said they couldn't keep them. So we had these what they call marmite cans, big thing about that big, and they were laying around. And it had gotten daylight and they didn't tell us that the German mortars were up on the hill up there. So we got out there and were helping ourselves to pancakes when all of the sudden the mortars broke out. I remember one looked like a mortar went right into those pans and scattered pancakes everywhere. And we had to run and get out of there. In fact, I saw one guy was running right beside him [tape inaudible]. I could tell he was dead before he hit the ground, but we enjoyed those pancakes. SE: Well anything else you want to add? [inaudible] COUNTER 414"],"dc_format":["video/quicktime"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Veterans History Project oral history recordings","Veterans History Project collection, MSS 1010, Kenan Research Center, Atlanta History Center"],"dcterms_subject":["World War, 1939-1945--Personal narratives, American","Ardennes, Battle of the, 1944-1945","V-J Day, 1945--Georgia--Atlanta","World War, 1939-1945--Medical care--Europe, Western","Alexander, Sarah Anna Huffaker, 1925-2002","Patton, George S. (George Smith), 1885-1945","United States. Army. Infantry Division, 87th","United States. Army. Infantry Regiment, 347th. Company L","Queen Elizabeth (ship)","United States. Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944"],"dcterms_title":["Oral history interview of William M. Alexander, Jr."],"dcterms_type":["MovingImage"],"dcterms_provenance":["Atlanta History Center"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://album.atlantahistorycenter.com/cdm/ref/collection/VHPohr/id/386"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":["This material is protected by copyright law. (Title 17, U.S. Code) Permission for use must be cleared through the Kenan Research Center at the Atlanta History Center. Licensing agreement may be required."],"dcterms_medium":["video recordings (physical artifacts)","mini-dv"],"dcterms_extent":["1:01:10"],"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"nge_ngen_albany-movement","title":"Albany Movement","collection_id":"nge_ngen","collection_title":"New Georgia Encyclopedia","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, Georgia, Dougherty County, Albany, 31.57851, -84.15574"],"dcterms_creator":["Formwalt, Lee W."],"dc_date":["2003-12-02"],"dcterms_description":["Encyclopedia article about the civil rights organization based in Albany, Georgia. According to traditional accounts the Albany Movement began in fall 1961 and ended in summer 1962. It was the first mass movement in the modern civil rights era to have as its goal the desegregation of an entire community, and it resulted in the jailing of more than 1,000 African Americans in Albany and surrounding rural counties. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Ralph Abernathy came to Albany with the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and were some of the demonstrators arrested. When told as a chapter in the history of the national civil rights movement, Albany was important because of King's involvement and because of the lessons he learned that he would soon apply in Birmingham, Alabama. It may also be viewed as a local movement with deep roots which creates a very different picture of the freedom struggle in the southwest corner of the state.","The Civil Rights Digital Library received support from a National Leadership Grant for Libraries awarded to the University of Georgia by the Institute of Museum and Library Services for the aggregation and enhancement of partner metadata.","GSE identifier: SS8H11"],"dc_format":null,"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":null,"dcterms_publisher":null,"dc_relation":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Forms part of the New Georgia Encyclopedia."],"dcterms_subject":["Civil rights movements--Georgia--Albany","African American civil rights workers--Georgia--Albany","African Americans--Politics and government","Albany Movement (Albany, Ga.)"],"dcterms_title":["Albany Movement"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["New Georgia Encyclopedia (Project)"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/history-archaeology/albany-movement/"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":["If you wish to use content from the NGE site for commercial use, publication, or any purpose other than fair use as defined by law, you must request and receive written permission from the NGE. Such requests may be directed to: Permissions/NGE, University of Georgia Press, 330 Research Drive, Athens, GA 30602."],"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":["Cite as: \"Albany Movement,\" New Georgia Encyclopedia. Retrieved [date]: http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org."],"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["articles"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":null},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_136","title":"Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118"],"dcterms_creator":["Arkansas. Department of Education"],"dc_date":["2003-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Education--Arkansas","Little Rock (Ark.). Office of Desegregation Monitoring","School integration--Arkansas","Arkansas. Department of Education","Project managers--Implements"],"dcterms_title":["Arkansas Department of Education's (ADE's) Project Management Tool"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/136"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nLittle Rock School District, plaintiff vs. Pulaski County Special School District, defendant.\nTOM COURTWAY Interim Director Stale Board of Education JoNell Caldwell, Chair Little Rock Shelby Hillman, Vice Chair Carlisle Sherry Burrow Jonesboro Luke Gordy Van Buren Calvin King Marianna R~awson Be.Ile MaryJane Rebick Pine Bluff Jeanna Westmoreland Arkadelphia Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Little Rock, AR 72201-1071 501-682-4475 December 30, 2003 Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes, Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, AR 72201 http:/ /arktdu.slale.ar.us RECEIVED\ntt\"' J OFFICEOF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RECEIVED JA\n~ 0 2 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING RE: Little Rock School District v. Pulaski County Special School District, et al. U.S. District Court No. 4:82-CV-866 Dear Gentlemen and Ms. Marshall: Per an agreement with the Attorney General's Office, I am filing the Arkansas Department of Education's Project Management Tool for the month of December 2003 in the above-referenced case. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sipely, ~~m..1. ... ~ General Counsel Arkansas Department of Education SS:law cc: Mark Hagemeier UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF V. No. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, et al DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF FILING In accordance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education hereby gives notice of the filing of the AD E's Project Management Tool for December 2003. Respectfully Submitted, ~$~ Scmith, #922 Attorney, Arkansas Department of Education #4 Capitol Mall, Room 404-A Little Rock, AR 72201 501-682-4227 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Scott Smith, certify that on December 30, 2003, I caused the foregoing document to be served by depositing a copy in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to each of the following: Mr. M. Samuel Jones, III Wright, Lindsey \u0026amp; Jennings 200 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. John W. Walker John Walker, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Mark Burnette Mitchell, Blackstock, Barnes Wagoner, Ivers \u0026amp; Sneddon P. 0. Box 1510 Little Rock, AR 72203-1510 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge \u0026amp; Clark 400 West Capitol, Suite 2000 Little Rock, AR 72201-3493 Mr. Stephen W. Jones Jack, Lyon \u0026amp; Jones 425 West Capitol, Suite 3400 Little Rock, AR 72201 Ms. Ann Marshall One Union National Plaza 124 West Capitol, Suite 1895 Little Rock, 2201 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL INTERVENOR$ KATHERINE W. KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENOR$ ADE'S PROJECT MANAGEMENT TOOL In compliance with the Court's Order of December 10, 1993, the Arkansas Department of Education (ADE) submits the following Project Management Tool to the parties and the Court. This document describes the progress the ADE has made since March 15, 1994, in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan and itemizes the ADE's progress against timelines presented in the Plan. IMPLEMENTATION PHASE ACTIVITY I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS A. Use the previous year's three quarter average daily membership to calculate MFPA (State Equalization) for the current school year. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Based on the information available at November 30, 2003, the ADE calculated the .Equalization Funding for FY:03/04, s.ubject to periodic adjustments: B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) B. Include all Magnet students in the resident District's average daily membership for calculation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Based on the information available at November 30, 2003, the ADE calculated for FY 03/04, subject to periodic adjustments. C. Process and distribute State MFPA. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 On November 30, 2003, distributions of State Equalization Funding for FY 03/04 were as follows: LRSD - $19,354,959 NLRSD- $10,209,120 PCSSD-$18,533,748 The allotments of State Equalization Funding calculated for FY 03/04 at November 30, 2003, subject to periodic adjustments, were as follows: LRSD - $53,226, 139 NLRSD - $28,075,080 PCSSD - $50,967,808 D. Determine the number of Magnet students resid ing in each District and attending a Magnet School. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Based on the information available, the ADE calculated at November 30, 2003 for FY 03/04, subject to periodic adjustments. E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as ordered by the Court. 2 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) E. Desegregation Staff Attorney reports the Magnet Operational Charge to the Fiscal Services Office. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Based on]he 1nforrnatjon available, the ADE calculated at November 30, 26()3 forfY 03704.: s(IbjJt(to perio'cl/c:~djustmerjts\nIt should be noted that currently the Magnet Review Committee is reporting this information instead of the staff attorney as indicated in the Implementation Plan. F. Calculate state aid due the LRSD based upon the Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Based on the inform'ation available, the ADE calculated at November 30, 2003 for FY 03/04, subject to periodic adjustments. G. Process and distribute state aid for Magnet Operational Charge. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Distributions for FY 03/04 at November 30, 2003, totaled $4,534,018. Allotment calculated for FY 03/04 was $12,343,806 subject to periodic adjustments. H. Calculate the amount of M-to-M incentive money to which each school district is entitled. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, August - June. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Calculated for FY 02/03, subject to periodic adjustments. I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. 1. Projected Ending Date Last day of each month, September - June. 3 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) I. Process and distribute M-to-M incentive checks. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Distributions for FY 03/04 at November 30, 2003 were: i.RSD : $1 '.0 105,266 NLRSD - $777,0?4 pcsso - $2,7.92,91~ The allotments calc4iated for FY 03/04 at November 30, 2003, subject to periocfic adjustments, were: LRSD - $3,684,217 NLRSD - $2,590,278 PCSSD - $9,309,708 J. Districts submit an estimated Magnet and M-to-M transportation budget to ADE. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, December of each year. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 In September 2002, the Magnet and M-to-M transportation budgets for FY 02/03 were submitted to the ADE by the Districts. K. The Coordinator of School Transportation notifies General Finance to pay districts for the Districts' proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 In January 2003, General Finance was notified to pay the second one-third payment for FY 02/03 to the Districts. It should be noted that the Transportation Coordinator is currently performing this function instead of Reginald Wilson as indicated in the Implementation Plan. L. ADE pays districts three equal installments of their proposed budget. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 4 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) L. ADE pays districts three equal installments of their proposed budget. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 In September 2003, General Finance made the last one-third payment to the Districts for their FY 02/03 transportation budget. The budget is now paid out in three equal installments. At September 2003, the following had been paid for FY 02/03: LRSD - $3,835,562.00 NLRSD - $742,399.62 PCSSD - $2,252,050.92 In September 2003, General Finance made the first one-third payment to the Districts for their FY 03/04 transportation budget. The budget is now paid out in three equal installments. At September 2003, the following had been paid for FY 03/04: LRSD - $1 ,243,841 .33 NLRSD - $263,000.00 PCSSD - $727,406.63 M. ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, annually. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 In August 1997, the ADE transportation coordinator reviewed each district's Magnet and M-to-M transportation costs for FY 96/97. In July 1998, each district was asked to submit an estimated budget for the 98/99 school year. In September 1998, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 98/99 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. School districts should receive payment by October 1, 1998 In July 1999, each district submitted an estimated budget for the 99/00 school year. In September 1999, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 99/00 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. 5 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) M. ADE verifies actual expenditures submitted by Districts and reviews each bill with each District's transportation coordinator. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) In September 2000, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 00/01 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2001 , paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 01/02 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2002, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 02/03 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. In September 2003, paperwork was generated for the first payment in the 03/04 school year for the Magnet and M-to-M transportation program. N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing, as stated in Exhibit A of the Implementation Plan. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 In FY 94/95, the State purchased 52 buses at a cost of $1 ,799,431 which were added to or replaced existing Magnet and M-to-M buses in the Districts. The buses were distributed to the Districts as follows: LRSD - 32\nNLRSD - 6\nand PCSSD - 14. The ADE purchased 64 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $2,334,800 in FY 95/96. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 45\nNLRSD - 7\nand PCSSD - 12. In May 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $646,400. In July 1997, the ADE purchased 16 Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $624,879. In July 1998, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $695,235. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD- 6. Specifications for 16 school buses have been forwarded to state purchasing for bidding in January, 1999 for delivery in July, 1999. 6 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The ADE accepted a bid on 16 buses for the Magnet and M/M transportation program. The buses will be delivered after July 1, 1999 and before August 1, 1999. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nPCSSD - 6. In July 1999, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $718,355. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD-6. In July 2000, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses at a cost of $724,165. The buses were distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8\nNLRSD - 2\nand PCSSD- 6. The bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was let by State Purchasing on February 22, 2001 . The contract was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include two type C 47 passenger buses and fourteen type C 65 passenger buses. Prices on these units are $43,426.00 each on the 47 passenger buses, and $44,289.00 each on the 65 passenger buses. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8 of the 65 passenger\nNLRSD - 2 of the 65 passenger\nPCSSD - 2 of the 47 passenger and 4 of the 65 passenger buses. On August 2, 2001 , the ADE took possession of 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses. The total amount paid was $706,898. In June 2002, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include five 47 passenger buses for $42,155.00 each, ten 65 passenger buses for $43,850.00 each, and one 47 passenger bus with a wheelchair lift for $46,952.00. The total amount was $696,227. In August of 2002, the ADE purchased 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses. The total amount paid was $696,227. Specifications for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M school buses have been forwarded to State Purchasing for bidding. Bids will be opened on May 12, 2003. The buses will have a required delivery date after July 1, 2003 and before August 8, 2003. 7 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) N. Purchase buses for the Districts to replace existing Magnet and M-to-M fleets and to provide a larger fleet for the Districts' Magnet and M-to-M Transportation needs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In June 2003, a bid for 16 new Magnet and M-to-M buses was awarded to Ward Transportation Services, Inc. The buses to be purchased include 5 - 47 passenger buses for $47,052.00 each, and 11 - 65 passenger buses for $48,895.00 each. The total amount was $773,105. The buses will be distributed accordingly: LRSD - 8 of the 65 passenger\nNLRSD - 2 of the 65 passenger\nPCSSD - 5 of the 47 passenger and 1 of the 65 passenger buses. 0. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to LRSD as required by page 23 of the Settlement Agreement. P. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 and January 1, of each school year through January 1, 1999. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Obligation fulfilled in FY 96/97. Process and distribute additional payments in lieu of formula to LRSD as required by page 24 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. Q. Process and distribute payments to PCSSD as required by Page 28 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1994. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Final payment was distributed July 1994. 8 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) R. Upon loan request by LRSD accompanied by a promissory note, the ADE makes loans to LRSD. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing through July 1, 1999. See Settlement Agreement page 24. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 The LRSD received $3,000,000 on September 10, 1998. As of this reporting date, the LRSD has received $20,000,000 in loan proceeds. S. Process and distribute payments in lieu of formula to PCSSD required by page 29 of the Settlement Agreement. T. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. Process and distribute compensatory education payments to NLRSD as required by page 31 of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date July 1 of each school year through June 30, 1996. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Obligation fulfilled in FY 95/96. U. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. 1. Projected Ending Date Payment due date and ending July 1, 1995. 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 97/98. Distribution in July 1998 for FY 98/99 was $75,000. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 98/99. 9 I. FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Continued) U. Process and distribute check to Magnet Review Committee. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) Distribution in July 1999 for FY 99/00 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 99/00. Distribution in July 2000 for FY 00/01 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 00/01 . Distribution in August 2001 for FY 01/02 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 01/02. Distribution in July 2002 for FY 02/03 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 02/03. Distribution in July 2003 for FY 03/04 was $92,500. This was the total amount due to the Magnet Review Committee for FY 03/04. V. Process and distribute payments for Office of Desegregation Monitoring. 1. 2. Projected Ending Date Not applicable. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 Distribution in July 1997 for FY 97/98 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 97/98. Distribution in July 1998 for FY 98/99 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 98/99. Distribution in July 1999 for FY 99/00 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 99/00. Distribution in July 2000 for FY 00/01 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 00/01 . Distribution in August 2001 for FY 01/02 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 01/02. Distribution in July 2002 for FY 02/03 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 02/03. Distribution in July 2003 for FY 03/04 was $200,000. This was the total amount due to the ODM for FY 03/04. 10 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. 1. Projected Ending Date January 15, 1995 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 In May 1995, monitors completed the unannounced visits of schools in Pulaski County. The monitoring process involved a qualitative process of document reviews, interviews, and observations. The monitoring focused on progress made since the announced monitoring visits. In June 1995, monitoring data from unannounced visits was included in the July Semiannual Report. Twenty-five per cent of all classrooms were visited, and all of the schools in Pulaski County were monitored. All principals were interviewed to determine any additional progress since the announced visits. The July 1995 Monitoring Report was reviewed by the ADE administrative team, the Arkansas State Board of Education, and the Districts and filed with the Court. The report was formatted in accordance with the Allen Letter. In October 1995, a common terminology was developed by principals from the Districts and the Lead Planning and Desegregation staff to facilitate the monitoring process. The announced monitoring visits began on November 14, 1995 and were completed on January 26, 1996. Copies of the preliminary Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the ADE administrative team and the State Board of Education in January 1996. A report on the current status of the Cycle 5 schools in the ECOE process and their school improvement plans was filed with the Court on February 1, 1996. The unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1996 and ended on May 10, 1996. In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and the data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The Districts provided data on enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Districts and the ADE Desegregation Monitoring staff developed a definition for instructional programs. 11 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996 with copies distributed to the parties. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996 and concluded in December 1996. In January 1997, presentations were made to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties to review the draft Semiannual Monitoring Report. The monitoring instrument and process were evaluated for their usefulness in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on achievement disparities. In February 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was filed . Unannounced monitoring visits began on February 3, 1997 and concluded in May 1997. In March 1997, letters were sent to the Districts regarding data requirements for the July 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and the additional discipline data element that was requested by the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Desegregation data collection workshops were conducted in the Districts from March 28, 1997 to April 7, 1997. A meeting was conducted on April 3, 1997 to finalize plans for the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report. Onsite visits were made to Cycle 1 schools who did not submit accurate and timely data on discipline, M-to-M transfers, and policy. The July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were finalized in June 1997. In July 1997, the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were filed with the court, and the ADE sponsored a School Improvement Conference. On July 10, 1997, copies of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were made available to the Districts for their review prior to filing it with the Court. In August 1997, procedures and schedules were organized for the monitoring of the Cycle 2 schools in FY 97 /98. 12 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) A Desegregation Monitoring and School Improvement Workshop for the Districts was held on September 10, 1997 to discuss monitoring expectations, instruments, data collection and school improvement visits. On October 9, 1997, a planning meeting was held with the desegregation monitoring staff to discuss deadlines, responsibilities, and strategic planning issues regarding the Semiannual Monitoring Report. Reminder letters were sent to the Cycle 2 principals outlining the data collection deadlines and availability of technical assistance. In October and November 1997, technical assistance visits were conducted, and announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 2 schools were completed. In December 1997 and January 1998, technical assistance visits were conducted regarding team visits, technical review recommendations, and consensus building. Copies of the infusion document and perceptual surveys were provided to schools in the ECOE process. The February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report was submitted for review and approval to the State Board of Education, the Director, the Administrative Team, the Attorney General's Office, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. Unannounced monitoring visits began in February 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process, external team visits and finalizing school improvement plans. On February 18, 1998, the representatives of all parties met to discuss possible revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. Additional meetings will be scheduled. Unannounced monitoring visits were conducted in March 1998, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process and external team visits. In April 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were conducted , and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. 13 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In May 1998, unannounced monitoring visits were completed, and technical assistance was provided on the school improvement process. On May 18, 1998, the Court granted the ADE relief from its obligation to file the July 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report to develop proposed modifications to ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. In June 1998, monitoring information previously submitted by the districts in the Spring of 1998 was reviewed and prepared for historical files and presentation to the Arkansas State Board. Also, in June the following occurred: a) The Extended COE Team Visit Reports were completed, b) the Semiannual Monitoring COE Data Report was completed, c) progress reports were submitted from previous cycles, and d.) staff development on assessment (SAT-9) and curriculum alignment was conducted with three supervisors. In July, the Lead Planner provided the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Committee with (1) a review of the court Order relieving ADE of its obligation to file a July Semiannual Monitoring Report, and (2) an update of ADE's progress toward work with the parties and ODM to develop proposed revisions to ADE's monitoring and reporting obligations. The Committee encouraged ODM, the parties and the ADE to continue to work toward revision of the monitoring and reporting process. In August 1998, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. The Assistant Attorney General, the Assistant Director for Accountability and the Education Lead Planner updated the group on all relevant desegregation legal issues and proposed revisions to monitoring and reporting activities during the quarter. In September 1998, tentative monitoring dates were established and they will be finalized once proposed revisions to the Desegregation Monitoring Plan are finalized and approved. In September/October 1998, progress was being made on the proposed revisions to the monitoring process by committee representatives of all the Parties in the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement. While the revised monitoring plan is finalized and approved, the ADE monitoring staff will continue to provide technical assistance to schools upon request. 14 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In December 1998, requests were received from schools in PCSSD regarding test score analysis and staff Development. Oak Grove is scheduled for January 21 , 1999 and Lawson Elementary is also tentatively scheduled in January. Staff development regarding test score analysis for Oak Grove and Lawson Elementary in the PCSSD has been rescheduled for April 2000. Staff development regarding test score analysis for Oak Grove and Lawson Elementary in the PCSSD was conducted on May 5, 2000 and May 9, 2000 respectively. Staff development regarding classroom management was provided to the Franklin Elementary School in LRSD on November 8, 2000. Staff development regarding ways to improve academic achievement was presented to College Station Elementary in PCSSD on November 22, 2000. On November 1, 2000, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. The Assistant Director for Accountability updated the group on all relevant desegregation legal issues and discussed revisions to monitoring and reporting activities during the quarter. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for February 27, 2001 in room 201-A at the ADE. The Implementation Phase Working Group meeting that was scheduled for February 27 had to be postponed. It will be rescheduled as soon as possible. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting is scheduled for June 27, 2001 . The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from June 27. It will take place on July 26, 2001 in room 201-A at 1 :30 p.m. at the ADE. 15 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On July 26, 2001 , the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, and Mr. Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 11 , 2001 in room 201-A at the ADE. On October 11 , 2001, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, discussed the ADE's intent to take a proactive role in Desegregation Monitoring. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 10, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. The Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting that was scheduled for January 10 was postponed. It has been rescheduled for February 14, 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. On February 12, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for April 11 , 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. On April 11 , 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for July 11 , 2002 in room 201-A at the ADE. 16 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On July 18, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, talked about section XV in the Project Management Tool (PMT) on Standardized Test Selection to Determine Loan Forgiveness. She said that the goal has been completed, and no additional reporting is required for section XV. Mr. Morris discussed the court case involving the LRSD seeking unitary status. He handed out a Court Order from May 9, 2002, which contained comments from U.S. District Judge Bill Wilson Jr., about hearings on the LRSD request for unitary status. Mr. Morris also handed out a document from the Secretary of Education about the No Child Left Behind Act. There was discussion about how this could have an affect on Desegregation issues. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 10, 2002 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from October 10. It will take place on October 29, 2002 in room 201-A at 1:30 p.m. at the ADE. On October 29, 2002, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Meetings with the parties to discuss possible revisions to the AD E's monitoring plan will be postponed by request of the school districts in Pulaski County. Additional meetings could be scheduled after the Desegregation ruling is finalized. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 9, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On January 9, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. No Child Left Behind and the Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD were discussed. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for April 10, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201- A at the ADE. The quarterly Implementation Phase Working Group meeting was rescheduled from April 10. It will take place on April 24, 2003 in room 201-A at 1 :30 p.m. at the ADE. 17 II. MONITORING COMPENSATORY EDUCATION (Continued) A. Begin testing and evaluating the monitoring instrument and monitoring system to assure that data is appropriate and useful in monitoring the impacts of compensatory education programs on disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On April 24, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Laws passed by the legislature need to be checked to make sure none of them impede desegregation. Ray Lumpkin was chairman of the last committee to check legislation. Since he left, we will discuss the legislation with Clearence Lovell. The Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD was discussed. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for July 10, 2003 at 1 :30 p.m. in room 201-A at the ADE. On August 28, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. The Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD was discussed. The LRSD has been instructed to submit evidence showing progress in reducing disparities in academic achievement for black students and white students. This is supposed to be done by March of 2004, so that the LRSD can achieve unitary status. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for October 9, 2003 at the ADE. On October 9, 2003, the ADE Implementation Phase Working Group met to review the Implementation Phase activities for the previous quarter. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, updated the group on all relevant desegregation issues. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, discussed the Desegregation ruling on unitary status for LRSD. The next Implementation Phase Working Group Meeting is scheduled for January 8, 2004 at the ADE. On October 16, 2003, ADE staff met with the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee at the State Capitol. Mr. Willie Morris, ADE Lead Planner for Desegregation, and Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, presented the Chronology of activity by the ADE in complying with provisions of the Implementation Plan for the Desegregation Settlement Agreement. They also discussed the role of the ADE Desegregation Monitoring Section. Mr. Mark Hagemeier, Assistant Attorney General, and Scott Smith, ADE Staff Attorney, reported on legal issues relating to the Pulaski County Desegregation Case. Ann Marshall shared a history of activities by ODM, and their view of the activity of the school districts in Pulaski County. John Kunkel discussed Desegregation funding by the ADE. 18 Ill. A PETITION FOR ELECTION FOR LRSD WILL BE SUPPORTED SHOULD A MILLAGE BE REQUIRED A. Monitor court pleadings to determine if LRSD has petitioned the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Ongoing. All Court pleadings are monitored monthly. B. Draft and file appropriate pleadings if LRSD petitions the Court for a special election. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 To date, no action has been taken by the LRSD. 19 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION A. Using a collaborative approach, immediately identify those laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date December, 1994 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. 8 . Conduct a review within ADE of existing legislation and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. C. Request of the other parties to the Settlement Agreement that they identify laws and regulations that appear to impede desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date November, 1994 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. D. Submit proposals to the State Board of Education for repeal of those regulations that are confirmed to be impediments to desegregation. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section IV.E. of this report. 20 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 A committee within the ADE was formed in May 1995 to review and collect data on existing legislation and regulations identified by the parties as impediments to desegregation. The committee researched the Districts' concerns to determine if any of the rules, regulations, or legislation cited impede desegregation. The legislation cited by the Districts regarding loss funding and worker's compensation were not reviewed because they had already been litigated. In September 1995, the committee reviewed the following statutes, acts, and regulations: Act 113 of 1993\nADE Director's Communication 93-205\nAct 145 of 1989\nADE Director's Memo 91-67\nADE Program Standards Eligibility Criteria for Special Education\nArkansas Codes 6-18-206, 6-20-307, 6-20-319, and 6-17- 1506. In October 1995, the individual reports prepared by committee members in their areas of expertise and the data used to support their conclusions were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. A report was prepared and submitted to the State Board of Education in July 1996. The report concluded that none of the items reviewed impeded desegregation. As of February 3, 1997, no laws or regulations have been determined to impede desegregation efforts. Any new education laws enacted during the Arkansas 81 st Legislative Session will be reviewed at the close of the legislative session to ensure that they do not impede desegregation. In April 1997, copies of all laws passed during the 1997 Regular Session of the 81 st General Assembly were requested from the office of the ADE Liaison to the Legislature for distribution to the Districts for their input and review of possible impediments to their desegregation efforts. In August 1997, a meeting to review the statutes passed in the prior legislative session was scheduled for September 9, 1997. 21 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On September 9, 1997, a meeting was held to discuss the review of the statutes passed in the prior legislative session and new ADE regulations. The Districts will be contacted in writing for their input regarding any new laws or regulations that they feel may impede desegregation. Additionally, the Districts will be asked to review their regulations to ensure that they do not impede their desegregation efforts. The committee will convene on December 1, 1997 to review their findings and finalize their report to the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. In October 1997, the Districts were asked to review new regulations and statutes for impediments to their desegregation efforts, and advise the ADE, in writing, if they feel a regulation or statute may impede their desegregation efforts. In October 1997, the Districts were requested to advise the ADE, in writing, no later than November 1, 1997 of any new law that might impede their desegregation efforts. As of November 12, 1997, no written responses were received from the Districts. The ADE concludes that the Districts do not feel that any new law negatively impacts their desegregation efforts. The committee met on December 1, 1997 to discuss their findings regarding statutes and regulations that may impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. The committee concluded that there were no laws or regulations that impede the desegregation efforts of the Districts. It was decided that the committee chair would prepare a report of the committee's findings for the Administrative Team and the State Board of Education. The committee to review statutes and regulations that impede desegregation is now reviewing proposed bills and regulations, as well as laws that are being signed in, for the current 1999 legislative session. They will continue to do so until the session is over. The committee to review statutes and regulations that impede desegregation will meet on April 26, 1999 at the ADE. The committee met on April 26, 1999 at the ADE. The purpose of the meeting was to identify rules and regulations that might impede desegregation, and review within the existing legislation any regulations that might result in an impediment to desegregation. This is a standing committee that is ongoing and a report will be submitted to the State Board of Education once the process is completed. 22 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The committee met on May 24, 1999 at the ADE. The committee was asked to review within the existing legislation any regulations that might result in an impediment to desegregation. The committee determined that Mr. Ray Lumpkin would contact the Pulaski County districts to request written response to any rules, regulations or laws that might impede desegregation. The committee would also collect information and data to prepare a report for the State Board. This will be a standing committee. This data gathering will be ongoing until the final report is given to the State Board. On July 26, 1999, the committee met at the ADE. The committee did not report any laws or regulations that they currently thought would impede desegregation, and are still waiting for a response from the three districts in Pulaski County. The committee met on August 30, 1999 at the ADE to review rules and regulations that might impede desegregation. At that time, there were no laws under review that appeared to impede desegregation. In November, the three districts sent letters to the ADE stating that they have reviewed the laws passed by the 82nd legislative session as well as current rules \u0026amp; regulations and district policies to ensure that they have no ill effect on desegregation efforts. There was some concern from PCSSD concerning a charter school proposal in the Maumelle area. The work of the committee is on-going each month depending on the information that comes before the committee. Any rules, laws or regulations that would impede desegregation will be discussed and reported to the State Board of Education. On October 4, 2000, the ADE presented staff development for assistant superintendents in LRSD, NLRSD and PCSSD regarding school laws of Arkansas. The ADE is in the process of forming a committee to review all Rules and Regulations from the ADE and State Laws that might impede desegregation. The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations will review all new laws that might impede desegregation once the 83rd General Assembly has completed this session. The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations will meet for the first time on June 11 , 2001 at 9:00 a.m. in room 204-A at the ADE. The committee will review all new laws that might impede desegregation that were passed during the 2001 Legislative Session. 23 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The ADE Committee on Statutes and Regulations rescheduled the meeting that was planned for June 11 , in order to review new regulations proposed to the State Board of Education. The meeting will take place on July 16, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on July 16, 2001 at the ADE. The following Items were discussed: (1) Review of 2001 state laws which appear to impede desegregation. (2) Review of existing ADE regulations which appear to impede desegregation. (3) Report any laws or regulations found to impede desegregation to the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts. The next meeting will take place on August 27, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on August 27, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. The next meeting will take place on September 10, 2001 in Conference Room 204-B at 2:00 p.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on September 10, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. The next meeting will take place on October 24, 2001 in Conference Room 204-B at 2:00 p.m. at the ADE. The ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation met on October 24, 2001 at the ADE. The Committee is reviewing all relevant laws or regulations produced by the Arkansas State Legislature, the ADE and the Pulaski County school districts in FY 2000/2001 to determine if they may impede desegregation. On December 17, 2001, the ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation composed letters that will be sent to the school districts in Pulaski County. The letters ask for input regarding any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. Laws to review include those of the 83rd General Assembly, ADE regulations, and regulations of the Districts. 24 IV. REPEAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS THAT IMPEDE DESEGREGATION (Continued) E. Submit proposals to the Legislature for repeal of those laws that appear to be impediments to desegregation. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On January 10, 2002, the ADE Committee to Repeal Statutes and Regulations that Impede Desegregation sent letters to the school districts in Pulaski County. The letters ask for input regarding any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. The districts were asked to respond by March 8, 2002. On March 5, 2002, A letter was sent from the LRSD which mentioned Act 17 48 and Act 1667 passed during the 83rd Legislative Session which may impede desegregation. These laws will be researched to determine if changes need to be made. A letter was sent from the NLRSD on March 19, noting that the district did not find any laws which impede desegregation. On April 26, 2002, A letter was sent for the PCSSD to the ADE, noting that the district did not find any laws which impede desegregation except the \"deannexation\" legislation which the District opposed before the Senate committee. On October 27, 2003, the ADE sent letters to the school districts in Pulaski County asking if there were any new laws or regulations that may impede desegregation. The districts were asked to review laws passed during the 84th Legislative Session, any new ADE rules or regulations, and district policies. 25 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES A. Through a preamble to the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 The preamble was contained in the Implementation Plan filed with the Court on March 15, 1994. B. Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement and outcomes of programs intended to apply those principles. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Ongoing C. Through execution of the Implementation Plan, the Board of Education will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement by actions taken by ADE in response to monitoring results. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 Ongoing D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 26 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 At each regular monthly meeting of the State Board of Education, the Board is provided copies of the most recent Project Management Tool (PMT) and an executive summary of the PMT for their review and approval. Only activities that are in addition to the Board's monthly review of the PMT are detailed below. In May 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the total number of schools visited during the monitoring phase and the data collection process. Suggestions were presented to the State Board of Education on how recommendations could be presented in the monitoring reports. In June 1995, an update on the status of the pending Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the State Board of Education. In July 1995, the July Semiannual Monitoring Report was reviewed by the State Board of Education. On August 14, 1995, the State Board of Education was informed of the need to increase minority participation in the teacher scholarship program and provided tentative monitoring dates to facilitate reporting requests by the ADE administrative team and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In September 1995, the State Board of Education was advised of a change in the PMT from a table format to a narrative format. The Board was also briefed about a meeting with the Office of Desegregation Monitoring regarding the PMT. In October 1995, the State Board of Education was updated on monitoring timelines. The Board was also informed of a meeting with the parties regarding a review of the Semiannual Monitoring Report and the monitoring process, and the progress of the test validation study. In November 1995, a report was made to the State Board of Education regarding the monitoring schedule and a meeting with the parties concerning the development of a common terminology for monitoring purposes. In December 1995, the State Board of Education was updated regarding announced monitoring visits. In January 1996, copies of the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report and its executive summary were provided to the State Board of Education. 27 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) During the months of February 1996 through May 1996, the PMT report was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. In June 1996, the State Board of Education was updated on the status of the bias review study. In July 1996, the Semiannual Monitoring Report was provided to the Court, the parties, ODM, the State Board of Education, and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In August 1996, the State Board of Education and the ADE administrative team were provided with copies of the test validation study prepared by Dr. Paul Williams. During the months of September 1996 through December 1996, the PMT was the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. On January 13, 1997, a presentation was made to the State Board of Education regarding the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report, and copies of the report and its executive summary were distributed to all Board members. The Project Management Tool and its executive summary were addressed at the February 10, 1997 State Board of Education meeting regarding the ADE's progress in fulfilling their obligations as set forth in the Implementation Plan. In March 1997, the State Board of Education was notified that historical information in the PMT had been summarized at the direction of the Assistant Attorney General in order to reduce the size and increase the clarity of the report. The Board was updated on the Pulaski County Desegregation Case and reviewed the Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by the Court on February 18, 1997 in response to the Districts' motion for summary judgment on the issue of state funding for teacher retirement matching contributions. During the months of April 1997 through June 1997, the PMTwas the only item on the agenda regarding the status of the implementation of the Monitoring Plan. The State Board of Education received copies of the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report and executive summary at the July Board meeting. 28 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on August 4, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. A special report regarding a historical review of the Pulaski County Settlement Agreement and the ADE's role and monitoring obligations were presented to the State Board of Education on September 8, 1997. Additionally, the July 15, 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Board for their review. In October 1997, a special draft report regarding disparity in achievement was submitted to the State Board Chairman and the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee. In November 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. The Implementation Phase Working Group held its quarterly meeting on November 3, 1997 to discuss the progress made in attaining the goals set forth in the Implementation Plan and the critical areas for the current quarter. In December 1997, the State Board of Education was provided copies of the monthly PMT and its executive summary. In January 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and discussed ODM's report on the ADE's monitoring activities and instructed the Director to meet with the parties to discuss revisions to the ADE's monitoring plan and monitoring reports. In February 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and discussed the February 1998 Semiannual Monitoring Report. In March 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary and was provided an update regarding proposed revisions to the monitoring process. In April 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. In May 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. 29 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In June 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The State Board of Education also reviewed how the ADE would report progress in the PMT concerning revisions in ADE's Monitoring Plan. In July 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The State Board of Education also received an update on Test Validation, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Committee Meeting, and revisions in ADE's Monitoring Plan. In August 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the five discussion points regarding the proposed revisions to the monitoring and reporting process. The Board also reviewed the basic goal of the Minority Recruitment Committee. In September 1998, the State Board of Education reviewed the proposed modifications to the Monitoring plans by reviewing the common core of written response received from the districts. The primary commonalities were (1) Staff Development, (2) Achievement Disparity and (3) Disciplinary Disparity. A meeting of the parties is scheduled to be conducted on Thursday, September 17, 1998. The Board encouraged the Department to identify a deadline for Standardized Test Validation and Test Selection. In October 1998, the Board received the progress report on Proposed Revisions to the Desegregation Monitoring and Reporting Process (see XVIII). The Board also reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary. In November, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the proposed revisions in the Desegregation monitoring Process and the update on Test validation and Test Selection provisions of the Settlement Agreement. The Board was also notified that the Implementation Plan Working Committee held its quarterly meeting to review progress and identify quarterly priorities. In December, the State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the joint motion by the ADE, the LRSD, NLRSD, and the PCSSD, to relieve the Department of its obligation to file a February Semiannual Monitoring Report. The Board was also notified that the Joshua lntervenors filed a motion opposing the joint motion. The Board was informed that the ADE was waiting on a response from Court. 30 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool , and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In January, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received an update on the joint motion of the ADE, LRSD, PCSSD, and NLRSD for an order relieving the ADE of filing a February 1999 Monitoring Report. The motion was granted subject to the following three conditions: (1) notify the Joshua intervenors of all meetings between the parties to discuss proposed changes, (2) file with the Court on or before February 1, 1999, a report detailing the progress made in developing proposed changes and (3) identify ways in which ADE might assist districts in their efforts to improve academic achievement. In February, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was informed that the three conditions: (1) notify the Joshua lntervenors of all meetings between the parties to discuss proposed changes, (2) file with the Court on or before February 1, 1999, a report detailing the progress made in developing proposed changes and (3) identify ways in which ADE might assist districts in their efforts to improve academic achievement had been satisfied. The Joshua lntervenors were invited again to attend the meeting of the parties and they attended on January 13, and January 28, 1999. They are also scheduled to attend on February 17, 1998. The report of progress, a collaborative effort from all parties was presented to court on February 1, 1999. The Board was also informed that additional items were received for inclusion in  the revised report, after the deadline for the submission of the progress report and the ADE would: (1) check them for feasibility, and fiscal impact if any, and (2) include the items in future drafts of the report. In March, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also received and reviewed the Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Progress Report submitted to Court on February 1, 1999. On April 12, and May 10, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. On June 14, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. 31 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On July 12, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board also was notified that once the financial section of the proposed plan was completed, the revised plan would be submitted to the board for approval. On August 9, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was also notified that the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan would be ready to submit to the Board for their review \u0026amp; approval as soon as plans were finalized. On September 13, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was also notified that the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan would be ready to submit to the Board for their review \u0026amp; approval as soon as plans were finalized. On October 12, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed the PMT and its executive summary. The Board was notified that on September 21 , 1999 that the Office of Education Lead Planning and Desegregation Monitoring meet before the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee and presented them with the draft version of the new Desegregation Monitoring and Assistance Plan. The State Board was notified that the plan would be submitted for Board review and approval when finalized. On November 8, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 13, 1999, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 14, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 13, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. 32 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On May 8, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 12, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 10, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 14, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. On September 11 , 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 9, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 13, 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 11 , 2000, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 8, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 12, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 12, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 9, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 14, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 11, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. 33 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On July 9, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 13, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. On September 10, 2001, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 8, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 19, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 10, 2001 , the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 14, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 11 , 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 11 , 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 8, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 13, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 10, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On July 8, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of June. On August 12, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of July. 34 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On September 9, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 14, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 18, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. On December 9, 2002, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. On January 13, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of December. On February 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of January. On March 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of February. On April 14, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of March. On May 12, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of April. On June 9, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of May. On August 11, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the months of June and July. On September 8, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of August. On October 13, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of September. On November 10, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of October. 35 V. COMMITMENT TO PRINCIPLES (Continued) D. Through regular oversight of the Implementation Phase's Project Management Tool, and scrutiny of results of ADE's actions, the Board of Education will act on its commitment to the principles of the Settlement Agreement. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On December 8, 2003, the Arkansas State Board of Education reviewed and approved the PMT and its executive summary for the month of November. 36 VI. REMEDIATION A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 During May 1995, team visits to Cycle 4 schools were conducted, and plans were developed for reviewing the Cycle 5 schools. In June 1995, the current Extended COE packet was reviewed , and enhancements to the Extended COE packet were prepared. In July 1995, year end reports were finalized by the Pulaski County field service specialists, and plans were finalized for reviewing the draft improvement plans of the Cycle 5 schools. In August 1995, Phase I - Cycle 5 school improvement plans were reviewed. Plans were developed for meeting with the Districts to discuss plans for Phase 11 - Cycle 1 schools of Extended COE, and a school improvement conference was conducted in Hot Springs. The technical review visits for the FY 95/96 year and the documentation process were also discussed. In October 1995, two computer programs, the Effective Schools Planner and the Effective Schools Research Assistant, were ordered for review, and the first draft of a monitoring checklist for Extended COE was developed. Through the Extended COE process, the field service representatives provided technical assistance based on the needs identified with in the Districts from the data gathered. In November 1995, ADE personnel discussed and planned for the FY 95/96 monitoring, and onsite visits were conducted to prepare schools for the FY 95/96 team visits. Technical review visits continued in the Districts. In December 1995, announced monitoring and technical assistance visits were conducted in the Districts. At December 31 , 1995, approximately 59% of the schools in the Districts had been monitored. Technical review visits were conducted during January 1996. In February 1996, announced monitoring visits and midyear monitoring reports were completed, and the field service specialists prepared for the spring NCA/COE peer team visits. 37 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) In March 1996, unannounced monitoring visits of Cycle 5 schools commenced, and two-day peer team visits of Cycle 5 schools were conducted. Two-day team visit materials, team lists and reports were prepared. Technical assistance was provided to schools in final preparation for team visits and to schools needing any school improvement information. In April and May 1996, the unannounced monitoring visits were completed. The unannounced monitoring forms were reviewed and included in the July monitoring report. The two-day peer team visits were completed, and annual COE monitoring reports were prepared. In June 1996, all announced and unannounced monitoring visits of the Cycle 5 schools were completed, and the data was analyzed. The Districts identified enrollment in compensatory education programs. The Semiannual Monitoring Report was completed and filed with the Court on July 15, 1996, and copies were distributed to the parties. During August 1996, meetings were held with the Districts to discuss the monitoring requirements. Technical assistance meetings with Cycle 1 schools were planned for 96/97. The Districts were requested to record discipline data in accordance with the Allen Letter. In September 1996, recommendations regarding the ADE monitoring schedule for Cycle 1 schools and content layouts of the semiannual report were submitted to the ADE administrative team for their review. Training materials were developed and schedules outlined for Cycle 1 schools. In October 1996, technical assistance needs were identified and addressed to prepare each school for their team visits. Announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools began on October 28, 1996. In December 1996, the announced monitoring visits of the Cycle 1 schools were completed, and technical assistance needs were identified from school site visits. In January 1997, the ECOE monitoring section identified technical assistance needs of the Cycle 1 schools, and the data was reviewed when the draft February Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, the State Board of Education, and the parties. 38 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In February 1997, field service specialists prepared for the peer team visits of the Cycle 1 schools. NCA accreditation reports were presented to the NCA Committee, and NCA reports were prepared for presentation at the April NCA meeting in Chicago. From March to May 1997, 111 visits were made to schools or central offices to work with principals, ECOE steering committees, and designated district personnel concerning school improvement planning. A workshop was conducted on Learning Styles for Geyer Springs Elementary School. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 15-17, 1997. The conference included information on the process of continuous school improvement, results of the first five years of COE, connecting the mission with the school improvement plan, and improving academic performance. Technical assistance needs were evaluated for the FY 97/98 school year in August 1997. From October 1997 to February 1998, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives. Technical assistance was provided to the Districts through meetings with the ECOE steering committees, assistance in analyzing perceptual surveys, and by providing samples of school improvement plans, Gold File catalogs, and web site addresses to schools visited. Additional technical assistance was provided to the Districts through discussions with the ECOE committees and chairs about the process. In November 1997, technical reviews of the ECOE process were conducted by the field service representatives in conjunction with the announced monitoring visits. Workshops on brainstorming and consensus building and asking strategic questions were held in January and February 1998. In March 1998, the field service representatives conducted ECOE team visits and prepared materials for the NCA workshop. Technical assistance was provided in workshops on the ECOE process and team visits. In April 1998, technical assistance was provided on the ECOE process and academically distressed schools. In May 1998, technical assistance was provided on the ECOE process, and team visits were conducted. 39 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) A. Through the Extended COE process, the needs for technical assistance by District, by School, and by desegregation compensatory education programs will be identified. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) In June 1998, the Extended COE Team Visit Reports were completed. A School Improvement Conference was held in Hot Springs on July 13-15, 1998. Major conference topics included information on the process of continuous school improvement, curriculum alignment, \"Smart Start,\" Distance Learning, using data to improve academic performance, educational technology, and multicultural education. All school districts in Arkansas were invited and representatives from Pulaski County attended. In September 1998, requests for technical assistance were received, visitation schedules were established, and assistance teams began visiting the Districts. Assistance was provided by telephone and on-site visits. The ADE provided inservice training on \"Using Data to Sharpen the Focus on Student Achievement\" at Gibbs Magnet Elementary school on October 5, 1998 at their request. The staff was taught how to increase test scores through data disaggregation, analysis, alignment, longitudinal achievement review, and use of individualized test data by student, teacher, class and content area. Information was also provided regarding the \"Smart Start\" and the \"Academic Distress\" initiatives. On October 20, 1998, ECOE technical assistance was provided to Southwest Jr. High School. B. Identify available resources for providing technical assistance for the specific condition, or circumstances of need, considering resources within ADE and the Districts, and also resources available from outside sources and experts. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. C. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 40 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) C. Through the ERIC system, conduct a literature search for research evaluating compensatory education programs. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 An updated ERIC Search was conducted on May 15, 1995 to locate research on evaluating compensatory education programs. The ADE received the updated ERIC disc that covered material through March 1995. An ERIC search was conducted in September 30, 1996 to identify current research dealing with the evaluation of compensatory education programs, and the articles were reviewed . An ERIC search was conducted in April 1997 to identify current research on compensatory education programs and sent to the Cycle 1 principals and the field service specialists for their use. An Eric search was conducted in October 1998 on the topic of Compensatory Education and related descriptors. The search included articles with publication dates from 1997 through July 1998. D. Identify and research technical resources available to ADE and the Districts through programs and organizations such as the Desegregation Assistance Center in S.an Antonio, Texas. 1. Projected Ending Date Summer 1994 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. E. Solicit, obtain, and use available resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 The information for this item is detailed under Section VI.F. of this report. 41 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. 1. Projected Ending Date Ongoing 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 From March 1995 through July 1995, technical assistance and resources were obtained from the following sources: the Southwest Regional Cooperative\nUALR regarding training for monitors\nODM on a project management software\nADHE regarding data review and display\nand Phi Delta Kappa, the Desegregation Assistance Center and the Dawson Cooperative regarding perceptual surveys. Technical assistance was received on the Microsoft Project software in November 1995, and a draft of the PMT report using the new software package was presented to the ADE administrative team for review. In December 1995, a data manager was hired permanently to provide technical assistance with computer software and hardware. In October 1996, the field service specialists conducted workshops in the Districts to address their technical assistance needs and provided assistance for upcoming team visits. In November and December 1996, the field service specialists addressed technical assistance needs of the schools in the Districts as they were identified and continued to provide technical assistance for the upcoming team visits. In January 1997, a draft of the February 1997 Semiannual Monitoring Report was presented to the State Board of Education, the Desegregation Litigation Oversight Subcommittee, and the parties. The ECOE monitoring section of the report included information that identified technical assistance needs and resources available to the Cycle 1 schools. Technical assistance was provided during the January 29-31, 1997 Title I MidWinter Conference. The conference emphasized creating a learning community by building capacity schools to better serve all children and empowering parents to acquire additional skills and knowledge to better support the education of their children. In February 1997, three ADE employees attended the Southeast Regional Conference on Educating Black Children. Participants received training from national experts who outlined specific steps that promote and improve the education of black children. 42 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On March 6-9, 1997, three members of the ADE's Technical Assistance Section attended the National Committee for School Desegregation Conference. The participants received training in strategies for Excellence and Equity: Empowerment and Training for the Future. Specific information was received regarding the current status of court-ordered desegregation, unitary status, and resegregation and distributed to the Districts and ADE personnel. The field service specialists attended workshops in March on ACT testing and school improvement to identify technical assistance resources available to the Districts and the ADE that will facilitate desegregation efforts. ADE personnel attended the Eighth Annual Conference on Middle Level Education in Arkansas presented by the Arkansas Association of Middle Level Education on April 6-8, 1997. The theme of the conference was Sailing Toward New Horizons. In May 1997, the field service specialists attended the NCA annual conference and an inservice session with Mutiu Fagbayi. An Implementation Oversight Committee member participated in the Consolidated COE Plan in service training. In June and July 1997, field service staff attended an SAT-9 testing workshop and participated in the three-day School Improvement Conference held in Hot Springs. The conference provided the Districts with information on the COE school improvement process, technical assistance on monitoring and assessing achievement, availability of technology for the classroom teacher, and teaching strategies for successful student achievement. In August 1997, field service personnel attended the ASCD Statewide Conference and the AAEA Administrators Conference. On August 18, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held and presentations were made on the Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) program and the Schools of the 21st Century program. In September 1997, technical assistance was provided to the Cycle 2 principals on data collection for onsite and offsite monitoring. ADE personnel attended the Region VI Desegregation Conference in October 1997. Current desegregation and educational equity cases and unitary status issues were the primary focus of the conference. On October 14, 1997, the bi-monthly Team V meeting was held in Paragould to enable members to observe a 21st Century school and a school that incorporates traditional and multi-age classes in its curriculum. 43 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) In November 1997, the field service representatives attended the Governor's Partnership Workshop to discuss how to tie the committee's activities with the ECOE process. In March 1998, the field service representatives attended a school improvement conference and conducted workshops on team building and ECOE team visits. Staff development seminars on Using Data to Sharpen the Focus on Student Achievement are scheduled for March 23, 1998 and March 27, 1998 for the Districts. In April 1998, the Districts participated in an ADE seminar to aid them in evaluating and improving student achievement. In August 1998, the Field Service Staff attended inservice to provide further assistance to schools, i.e., Title I Summer Planning Session, ADE session on Smart Start, and the School Improvement Workshops. All schools and districts in Pulaski County were invited to attend the \"Smart Start\" Summit November 9, 10, and 11 to learn more about strategies to increase student performance. \"Smart Start\" is a standards-driven educational initiative which emphasizes the articulation of clear standards for student achievement and accurate measures of progress against those standards through assessments, staff development and individual school accountability. The Smart Start Initiative focused on improving reading and mathematics achievement for all students in Grades K-4. Representatives from all three districts attended. On January 21 , 1998, the ADE provided staff development for the staff at Oak Grove Elementary School designed to assist them with their efforts to improve student achievement. Using achievement data from Oak Grove, educators reviewed trends in achievement data, identified areas of greatest need, and reviewed seven steps for improving student performance. On February 24, 1999, the ADE provided staff development for the administrative staff at Clinton Elementary School regarding analysis of achievement data. On February 15, 1999, staff development was rescheduled for Lawson Elementary School. The staff development program was designed to assist them with their efforts to improve student achievement using achievement data from Lawson, educators reviewed the components of the Arkansas Smart Initiative, trends in achievement data, identified areas of greatest need, and reviewed seven steps for improving student performance. Student Achievement Workshops were rescheduled for Southwest Jr. High in the Little Rock School District, and the Oak Grove Elementary School in the Pulaski County School District. 44 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On April 30, 1999, a Student Achievement Workshop was conducted for Oak Grove Elementary School in PCSSD. The Student Achievement Workshop for Southwest Jr. High in LRSD has been rescheduled. On June 8, 1999, a workshop was presented to representatives from each of the Arkansas Education Service Cooperatives and representatives from each of the three districts in Pulaski County. The workshop detailed the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP). On June 18, 1999, a workshop was presented to administrators of the NLRSD. The workshop detailed the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment and Accountability Program (ACTAAP) . On August 16, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACTAAP program was presented during the preschool staff development activities for teaching assistant in the LRSD. On August 20, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACTAAP program was presented during the preschool staff development activities for the Accelerated Learning Center in the LRSD. On September 13, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement and the components of the new ACTAAP program were presented to the staff at Booker T. Washington Magnet Elementary School. On September 27, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was presented to the Middle and High School staffs of the NLRSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On October 26, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was presented to LRSD personnel through a staff development training class. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On December 7, 1999, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was scheduled for Southwest Middle School in the LRSD. The workshop was also set to cover the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. However, Southwest Middle School administrators had a need to reschedule, therefore the workshop will be rescheduled. 45 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On January 10, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for both Dr. Martin Luther King Magnet Elementary School \u0026amp; Little Rock Central High School. The workshops also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On March 1, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for all principals and district level administrators in the PCSSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. On April 12, 2000, professional development on ways to increase student achievement was conducted for the LRSD. The workshop also covered the components of the new ACTAAP program, and ACT 999 of 1999. Targeted staffs from the middle and junior high schools in the three districts in Pulaski County attended the Smart Step Summit on May 1 and May 2. Training was provided regarding the overview of the \"Smart Step\" initiative, \"Standard and Accountability in Action ,\" and \"Creating Learning Environments Through Leadership Teams.\" The ADE provided training on the development of alternative assessment September 12-13, 2000. Information was provided regarding the assessment of Special Education and LEP students. Representatives from each district were provided the opportunity to select a team of educators from each school within the district to participate in professional development regarding Integrating Curriculum and Assessment K-12. The professional development activity was directed by the national consultant, Dr. Heidi Hays Jacobs, on September 14 and 15, 2000 The ADE provided professional development workshops from October 2 through October 13, 2000 regarding, \"The Write Stuff: Curriculum Frameworks, Content Standards and Item Development.\" Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation provided the training. Representatives from each district were provided the opportunity to select a team of educators from each school within the district to participate. The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems by video conference for Special Education and LEP Teachers on November 17, 2000. Also, Alternative Assessment Portfolio System Training was provided for testing coordinators through teleconference broadcast on November 27, 2000. 46 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On December 12, 2000, the ADE provided training for Test Coordinators on end of course assessments in Geometry and Algebra I Pilot examination. Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation conducted the professional development at the Arkansas Teacher Retirement Building. The ADE presented a one-day training session with Dr. Cecil Reynolds on the Behavior Assessment for Children (BASC). This took place on December 7, 2000 at the NLRSD Administrative Annex. Dr. Reynolds is a practicing clinical psychologist. He is also a professor at Texas A \u0026amp; M University and a nationally known author. In the training, Dr. Reynolds addressed the following: 1) how to use and interpret information obtained on the direct observation form , 2) how to use this information for programming, 3) when to use the BASC, 4) when to refer for more or additional testing or evaluation, 5) who should complete the forms and when, (i.e. , parents, teachers, students), 6) how to correctly interpret scores. This training was intended to especially benefit School Psychology Specialists, psychologists, psychological examiners, educational examiners and counselors. During January 22-26, 2001 the ADE presented the ACTAAP Intermediate (Grade 6) Benchmark Professional Development Workshop on Item Writing. Experts from the Data Recognition Corporation provided the training. Representatives from each district were invited to attend. On January 12, 2001 the ADE presented test administrators training for mid-year End of Course (Pilot) Algebra I and Geometry exams. This was provided for schools with block scheduling. On January 13, 2001 the ADE presented SmartScience Lessons and worked with teachers to produce curriculum. This was shared with eight Master Teachers. The SmartScience Lessons were developed by the Arkansas Science Teachers Association in conjunction with the Wilbur Mills Educational Cooperative under an Eisenhower grant provided by the ADE. The purpose of SmartScience is to provide K-6 teachers with activity-oriented science lessons that incorporate reading , writing, and mathematics skills. The following training has been provided for educators in the three districts in Pulaski County by the Division of Special Education at the ADE since January 2000: On January 6, 2000, training was conducted for the Shannon Hills Pre-school Program, entitled \"Things you can do at home to support your child's learning.\" This was presented by Don Boyd - ASERC and Shelley Weir. The school's director and seven parents attended . 47 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On March 8, 2000, training was conducted for the Southwest Middle School in Little Rock, on ADD. Six people attended the training. There was follow-up tra ining on Learning and Reading Styles on March 26. This was presented by Don Boyd - ASERC and Shelley Weir. On September 7, 2000, Autism and Classroom Accommodations for the LRSD at Chicot Elementary School was presented. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Karen Sabo, Kindergarten Teacher\nMelissa Gleason, Paraprofessional\nCurtis Mayfield, P.E. Teacher\nLisa Poteet, Speech Language Pathologist\nJane Harkey, Principal\nKathy Penn-Norman, Special Education Coordinator\nAlice Phillips, Occupational Therapist. On September 15, 2000, the Governor's Developmental Disability Coalition Conference presented Assistive Technology Devices \u0026amp; Services. This was held at the Arlington Hotel in Hot Springs. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On September 19, 2000, Autism and Classroom Accommodations for the LRSD at Jefferson Elementary School was presented. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Melissa Chaney, Special Education Teacher\nBarbara Barnes, Special Education Coordinator\na Principal, a Counselor, a Librarian, and a Paraprofessional. On October 6, 2000, Integrating Assistive Technology Into Curriculum was presented at a conference in the Hot Springs Convention Center. Presenters were: Bryan Ayers and Aleecia Starkey. Speech Language Pathologists from LRSD and NLRSD attended. On October 24, 2000, Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On October 25 and 26, 2000, Alternate Assessment for Students with Severe Disabilities for the LRSD at J. A. Fair High School was presented. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. The participants were: Susan Chapman, Special Education Coordinator\nMary Steele, Special Education Teacher\nDenise Nesbit, Speech Language Pathologist\nand three Paraprofessionals. On November 14, 2000, Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. On November 17, 2000, training was conducted on Autism for the LRSD at the Instructional Resource Center. Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. 48 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On December 5, 2000, Access to the Curriculum Via the use of Assistive Technology Computer Lab was presented. Bryan Ayres was the presenter of this teleconference. The participants were: Tim Fisk, Speech Language Pathologist from Arch Ford Education Service Cooperative at Plumerville and Patsy Lewis, Special Education Teacher from Mabelvale Middle School in the LRSD. On January 9, 2001 , Consideration and Assessment of Assistive Technology was presented through Compressed Video-Teleconference at the ADE facility in West Little Rock. Bryan Ayres was the presenter. Kathy Brown, a vision consultant from the LRSD, was a participant. On January 23, 2001 , Autism and Classroom Modifications for the LRSD at Brady Elementary School was presented . Bryan Ayres and Shelley Weir were presenters. The participants were: Beverly Cook, Special Education Teacher\nAmy Littrell , Speech Language Pathologist\nJan Feurig, Occupational Therapist\nCarolyn James, Paraprofessional\nCindy Kackly, Paraprofessional\nand Rita Deloney, Paraprofessional. The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems for Special Education and Limited English Proficient students through teleconference broadcast on February 5, 2001 . Presenters were: Charlotte Marvel, ADE\nDr. Gayle Potter, ADE\nMarcia Harding, ADE\nLynn Springfield, ASE RC\nMary Steele, J. A. Fair High School, LRSD\nBryan Ayres, Easter Seals Outreach. This was provided for Special Education teachers and supervisors in the morning, and Limited English Proficient teachers and supervisors in the afternoon. The Special Education session was attended by 29 teachers/administrators and provided answers to specific questions about the alternate assessment portfolio system and the scoring rubric and points on the rubric to be used to score the portfolios. The LEP session was attended by 16 teachers/administrators and disseminated the common tasks to be included in the portfolios: one each in mathematics, writing and reading. On February 12-23, 2001, the ADE and Data Recognition Corporation personnel trained Test Coordinators in the administration of the spring Criterion-Referenced Test. This was provided in 20 sessions at 10 regional sites. Testing protocol, released items, and other testing materials were presented and discussed. The sessions provided training for Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy, Algebra and Geometry Pilot Tests. The LRSD had 2 in attendance for the End of Course session and 2 for the Benchmark session. The NLRSD had 1 in attendance for the End of Course session and 1 for the Benchmark session. The PCSSD had 1 in attendance for the End of Course session and 1 for the Benchmark session. 49 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On March 15, 2001 , there was a meeting at the ADE to plan professional development for staff who work with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students. A $30,000 grant has been created to provide LEP training at Chicot Elementary for a year, starting in April 2001. A $40,000 grant was created to provide a Summer English as Second Language (ESL) Academy for the LRSD from June 18 through 29, 2001 . Andre Guerrero from the ADE Accountability section met with Karen Broadnax, ESL Coordinator at LRSD, Pat Price, Early Childhood Curriculum Supervisor at LRSD, and Jane Harkey, Principal of Chicot Elementary. On March 1-2 and 8-29, 2001 , ADE staff performed the following activities: processed registration for April 2 and 3 Alternate Portfolio Assessment video conference quarterly meeting\nanswered questions about Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) and LEP Alternate Portfolio Assessment by phone from schools and Education Service Cooperatives\nand signed up students for alternate portfolio assessment from school districts. On March 6, 2001, ADE staff attended a Smart Step Technology Leadership Conference at the State House Convention Center. On March 7, 2001 , ADE staff attended a National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Regional Math Framework Meeting about the Consensus Project 2004. On March 8, 2001 , there was a one-on-one conference with Carole Villarreal from Pulaski County at the ADE about the LEP students with portfolios. She was given pertinent data, including all the materials that have been given out at the video conferences. The conference lasted for at least an hour. On March 14, 2001 , a Test Administrator's Training Session was presented specifically to LRSD Test Coordinators and Principals. About 60 LRSD personnel attended. The following meetings have been conducted with educators in the three districts in Pulaski County since July 2000. On July 10-13, 2000 the ADE provided Smart Step training. The sessions covered Standards-based classroom practices. 50 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On July 19-21, 2000 the ADE held the Math/Science Leadership Conference at UCA. This provided services for Arkansas math and science teachers to support systemic reform in math/science and training for 8th grade Benchmark. There were 200 teachers from across the state in attendance. On August 14-31 , 2000 the ADE presented Science Smart Start Lessons and worked with teachers to produce curriculum. This will provide K-6 teachers with activity-oriented science lessons that incorporate reading, writing, and mathematics skills. On September 5, 2000 the ADE held an Eisenhower Informational meeting with Teacher Center Coordinators. The purpose of the Eisenhower Professional Development Program is to prepare teachers, school staff, and administrators to help all students meet challenging standards in the core academic subjects. A summary of the program was presented at the meeting. On November 2-3, 2000 the ADE held the Arkansas Conference on Teaching. This presented curriculum and activity workshops. More than 1200 attended the conference. On November 6, 2000 there was a review of Science Benchmarks and sample model curriculum. A committee of 6 reviewed and revised a drafted document. The committee was made up of ADE and K-8 teachers. On November 7-10, 2000 the ADE held a meeting of the Benchmark and End of Course Mathematics Content Area Committee. Classroom teachers reviewed items for grades 4, 6, 8 and EOC mathematics assessment. There were 60 participants. On December 4-8, 2000 the ADE conducted grades 4 and 8 Benchmark Scoring for Writing Assessment. This professional development was attended by approximately 750 teachers. On December 8, 2000 the ADE conducted Rubric development for Special Education Portfolio scoring. This was a meeting with special education supervisors to revise rubric and plan for scoring in June. On December 8, 2000 the ADE presented the Transition Mathematics Pilot Training Workshop. This provided follow-up training and activities for fourth-year mathematics professional development. On December 12, 2000 the ADE presented test administrators training for midyear End of Course (Pilot) Algebra I and Geometry exams. This was provided for schools with block scheduling. 51 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The ADE provided training on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems for Special Education and Limited English Proficient students through teleconference broadcasts on April 2-3, 2001 . Administration of the Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy took place on April 23-27, 2001 . Administration of the End of Course Algebra and Geometry Exams took place on May 2-3, 2001 . Over 1,100 Arkansas educators attended the Smart Step Growing Smarter Conference on July 10 and 11 , 2001 , at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center. Smart Step focuses on improving student achievement for Grades 5-8. The Smart Step effort seeks to provide intense professional development for teachers and administrators at the middle school level, as well as additional materials and assistance to the state's middle school teachers. The event began with opening remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. Carl Boyd, a longtime educator and staff consultant for Learning 24-7, presented the first keynote address on \"The Character-Centered Teacher\". Debra Pickering, an education consultant from Denver, Colorado, presented the second keynote address on \"Characteristics of Middle Level Education\". Throughout the Smart Step conference, educators attended breakout sessions that were grade-specific and curriculum area-specific. Pat Davenport, an education consultant from Houston, Texas, delivered two addresses. She spoke on \"A Blueprint for Raising Student Achievement\". Representatives from all three districts in Pulaski County attended. Over 1,200 Arkansas teachers and administrators attended the Smart Start Conference on July 12, 2001 , at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center. Smart Start is a standards-driven educational initiative which emphasizes the articulation of clear standards for student achievement and accurate measures of progress against those standards through assessments, staff development and individual school accountability. The Smart Start Initiative focused on improving reading and mathematics achievement for all students in Grades K-4. The event began with opening remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. Carl Boyd, a longtime educator and staff consultant for Learning 24-7, presented the keynote address. The day featured a series of 15 breakout sessions on best classroom practices. Representatives from all three districts in Pulaski County attended. On July 18-20, 2001 , the ADE held the Math/Science Leadership Conference at UCA. This provided services for Arkansas math and science teachers to support systemic reform in math/science and training for 8th grade Benchmark. There were approximately 300 teachers from across the state in attendance. 52 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) The ADE and Harcourt Educational Measurement conducted Stanford 9 test administrator training from August 1-9, 2001. The training was held at Little Rock, Jonesboro, Fort Smith, Forrest City, Springdale, Mountain Home, Prescott, and Monticello. Another session was held at the ADE on August 30, for those who were unable to attend August 1-9. The ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by video conference at the Education Service Cooperatives and at the ADE from 9:00 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on September 5, 2001 . The ADE released the performance of all schools on the Primary and Middle Level Benchmark Exams on September 5, 2001 . The ADE conducted Transition Core Teacher In-Service training for Central in the LRSD on September 6, 2001 . The ADE conducted Transition Checklist training for Hall in the LRSD on September 7, 2001 . The ADE conducted Transition Checklist training for McClellan in the LRSD on September 13, 2001 . The ADE conducted Basic Co-teaching train ing for the LRSD on October 9, 2001 . The ADE conducted training on autism spectrum disorder for the PCSSD on October 15, 2001 . Professional Development workshops (1 day in length) in scoring End of Course assessments in algebra, geometry and reading were provided for all districts in the state. Each school was invited to send three representatives (one for each of the sessions). LRSD, NLRSD, and PCSSD participated. Information and training materials pertaining to the Alternate Portfolio Assessment were provided to all districts in the state and were supplied as requested to LRSD, PCSSD and David 0 . Dodd Elementary. On November 1-2, 2001 the ADE held the Arkansas Conference on Teaching at the Excelsior Hotel \u0026amp; Statehouse Convention Center. This presented sessions, workshops and short courses to promote exceptional teaching and learning. Educators could become involved in integrated math, science, English \u0026amp; language arts and social studies learning. The ADE received from the schools selected to participate in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a list of students who will take the test. 53 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31, 2003 (Continued) On December 3-7, 2001 the ADE conducted grade 6 Benchmark scoring training for reading and math. Each school district was invited to send a math and a reading specialist. The training was held at the Holiday Inn Airport in Little Rock. On December 4 and 6, 2001 the ADE conducted Mid-Year Test Administrator Training for Algebra and Geometry. This was held at the Arkansas Activities Association's conference room in North Little Rock. On January 24, 2002, the ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by ADE compressed video with Fred Jones presenting. On January 31, 2002, the ADE conducted the Smart Step quarterly meeting by NSCI satellite with Fred Jones presenting. On February 7, 2002, the ADE Smart Step co-sponsored the AR Association of Middle Level Principal's/ADE curriculum, assessment and instruction workshop with Bena Kallick presenting. On February 11-21, 2002, the ADE provided training for Test Administrators on the Primary, Intermediate, and Middle Level Benchmark Exams as well as End of Course Literacy, Algebra and Geometry Exams. The sessions took place at Forrest City, Jonesboro, Mountain Home, Springdale, Fort Smith, Monticello, Prescott, Arkadelphia and Little Rock. A make-up training broadcast was given at 15 Educational Cooperative Video sites on February 22. During February 2002, the LRSD had two attendees for the Benchmark Exam training and one attendee for the End of Course Exam training. The N LRSD and PCSSD each had one attendee at the Benchmark Exam training and one attendee for the End of Course Exam training. The ADE conducted the Smart Start quarterly meeting by compressed interactive video at the South Central Education Service Cooperative from 9:30 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on May 2, 2002. Telecast topics included creating a standards-based classroom and a seven-step implementation plan. The principal's role in the process was explained. The ADE conducted the Smart Step quarterly meeting by compressed interactive video at the South Central Education Service Cooperative from 9:30 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on May 9, 2002. Telecast topics included creating a standards-based classroom and a seven-step implementation plan. The principal's role in the process was explained. 54 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The Twenty-First Annual Curriculum and Instruction Conference, cosponsored by the Arkansas Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development and the Arkansas Department of Education, will be held June 24-26, 2002, at the Arlington Hotel in Hot Springs, Arkansas. \"Ignite Your Enthusiasm for Learning\" is the theme for this year's conference, which will feature educational consultant, Dr. Debbie Silver, as well as other very knowledgeable presenters. Additionally, there will be small group sessions on Curriculum Alignment, North Central Accreditation, Section 504, Building Level Assessment, Administrator Standards, Data Disaggregation, and National Board. The Educational Accountability Unit of the ADE hosted a workshop entitled \"Strategies for Increasing Achievement on the ACT AAP Benchmark Examination\" on June 13-14, 2002 at the Agora Center in Conway. The workshop was presented for schools in which 100% of students scored below the proficient level on one or more parts of the most recent Benchmark Examination. The agenda included presentations on \"The Plan-Do-Check-Act Instructional Cycle\" by the nationally known speaker Pat Davenport. ADE personnel provided an explanation of the MPH point program. Presentations were made by Math and Literacy Specialists. Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, gave a presentation about ACTAAP. Break out sessions were held, in which school districts with high scores on the MPH point program offered strategies and insights into increasing student achievement. The NLRSD, LRSD, and PCSSD were invited to attend. The NLRSD attended the workshop. The Smart Start Summer Conference took place on July 8-9, 2002, at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center and Peabody Hotel. The Smart Start Initiative focuses on improving reading and mathematics achievement for all students in Grades K-4. The event included remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. After comments by the Director, Bena Kallick presented the keynote address \"Beyond Mapping: Essential Questions, Assessment, Higher Order Thinking\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. On the second day, Vivian Moore gave the keynote address \"Overcoming Obstacles: Avenues for Student Success\". Krista Underwood gave the presentation \"Put Reading First in Arkansas\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. 55 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) The Smart Step Summer Conference took place on July 10-11 , 2002, at the Little Rock Statehouse Convention Center and Peabody Hotel. Smart Step focuses on improving student achievement for Grades 5-8. The event included remarks by Ray Simon, Director of the ADE. After comments by the Director, Vivian Moore presented the keynote address \"Overcoming Obstacles: Avenues for Student Success\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. On the second day, Bena Kallick presented \"Beyond Mapping: Essential Questions, Assessment, Higher Order Thinking\". Ken Stamatis presented \"Smart Steps to Creating a School Culture That Supports Adolescent Comprehension\". This was followed by a series of breakout sessions on best classroom practices. On August 8, 2002, Steven Weber held a workshop at Booker T. Washington Elementary on \"Best Practices in Social Studies\". It was presented to the 4th grade teachers in the Little Rock School District. The workshop focused around the five themes of geography and the social studies (fourth grade) framework/standards. Several Internet web sites were shared with the teachers, and the teachers were shown methods for incorporating writing into fourth grade social studies. One of the topics was using primary source photos and technology to stimulate the students to write about diverse regions. A theme of the workshop included identifying web sites which apply to fourth grade social studies teachers and interactive web sites for fourth grade students. This was a Back-to-School In-service workshop. The teachers were actively involved in the workshop. On August 13 Steven Weber conducted a workshop at Parkview High School in the LRSD. Topics of the workshop included: 1. Incorporating Writing in the Social Studies Classroom 2. Document Based (open-ended) Questioning Techniques 3. How to practice writing on a weekly basis without assigning a lengthy research report 4. Developing Higher Level Thinking Skills in order to produce active citizens, rather than passive, uninformed citizens 5. Using the Social Studies Framework 6. Identifying state and national Web Sites which contain Primary Sources for use in the classroom The 8:30 - 11 :30 session was for the 6 - 8 grade social studies teachers. The 12:30 - 3:00 session was for the 9 - 12 grade social studies teachers. Several handouts were used, also PowerPoint, primary source photos and documents, and Internet web sites (i.e., Library of Congress, Butler Center for Arkansas Studies, National Archives, etc.). This was a Back-to-School In-service workshop. The teachers were actively involved in the workshop. Marie McNeal is the Social Studies Specialist for the Little Rock School District. She invited Steven Weber to present at the workshop, and was in attendance. 56 VI. REMEDIATION (Continued) F. Evaluate the impact of the use of resources for technical assistance. (Continued) 2. Actual as of December 31 , 2003 (Continued) On September 30 through October 11, 2002, the ADE provided Professional Development for Test Administrators on the End of Course Literacy, Algebra and Geometry Exams. The training was held at the Holiday Inn Airport. All three districts in Pulaski County sent representatives to the training. On October 3, 2002, Charlotte Marvel provided in-service training for LEP teachers in the Little Rock School District. On December 6, 2002, the Community and Parent Empowerment Summit was held for parents of children attending the LRSD. It took place at the Saint Mark Baptist Church in Little Rock. Dr. Charity Smith, Assistant Director for Accountability, presented information on No Child Left Behind, Supplemental Services, after school tutoring, how parents can help, and the Refrigerator Curriculum. Mr. Reginald Wilson, Senior Coordinator for Accountability, presented information on ACTAAP, including how to find information on the AS-IS Website and what is included in the school report cards. Donna Elam spoke on the topic \"From the School House to the Jail House\". On December 10 - 12, 2002, the Math Workshop \"Investigations in Number, Data and Space\" was held at the Clinton Elementary Magnet School in Sherwood. Training for Kindergarten and First Grade Teachers was held on December 10, and included Making Shapes and Building Blocks, Quilts, Squares and Block Towns. Training for Second and Third Grade Teachers was held on December 11 , and included Shapes, Halves, Symmetry and Turtle Paths. Training for Fourth and Fifth Grade Teachers was held on December 12. Fourth grade covered Seeing Solids and Silhouettes. Fifth Grade was about Containers and Cubes. The sessions provided quality time for teachers to discuss the curriculum, reflect on implications, provide mutual support, and continue planning. The ADE provided professional development for all school districts on Alternative Assessment Portfolio Systems on January 7-9, 2003 at the Holiday Inn Airport. The LRSD had two in attendance, NLRSD had one in attendance, and the PCSSD had two in attendance. The ADE conducted the Smart Start Statewide Professional Staff Development Video Conference at the ADE/AETN Studio and at participating Education Service Cooperatives from 9:30 a.m. until 11 :30 a.m. on February 12, 2003. The ADE conducted the Smart Step Statewide Professi\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eArkansas. Department of Education\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_459","title":"An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998-2003","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":["Cleaver, Vanessa E.","Wold, Donald C.","Glasgow, Dennis","Little Rock School District"],"dc_date":["2003-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Evaluation","Educational statistics"],"dcterms_title":["An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998-2003"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/459"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nV z i RECEIVED JAN 1 3 2004 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003 December 2003 Donald C. Wold, Ph.D. Vanessa E. Cleaver Dennis Glasgow Division of Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206 501 447-3320 www.lrsd.orgAn Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003 December 2003 Donald C. Wold, Ph.D. Vanessa E. Cleaver Deimis Glasgow Division of Instruction Little Rock School District 3001 S. Pulaski Street Little Rock, AR 72206 501 447-3320 www.lrsd.orgii Executive Summary This report examines student assessments over a five-year period in the Little Rock School District (LRSD) from 1998 to 2003. The report also looks at course taking and completion trends over the five years in mathematics and science courses, along with policy issues and curriculum changes. The five year period was selected because LRSD had a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF) over that period of time to create systemic change in mathematics and science programs that would lead to increased student achievement and preparation of more students to pursue undergraduate programs of study in mathematics, science, and engineering. The LRSD program, funded by NSF, was Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA). The effective date of the CPMSA program was September 1, 1998, and the expiration date for this program was August 31, 2003. The program evaluation was oriented around the following questions concerning all students and African American students in particular:  Was the CPMSA program effective in improving the achievement of Afncan American students?  Have levels of achievement changed for all students and for Afncan American students who perform at or above basic, at or above proficient, and at or above the advanced achievement level?  Have enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and for Afncan American students in S* grade Algebra 1?  Have the enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and Afncan American students in G 9-12 mathematics gate-keeping courses (Algebra I, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus)?  Have enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and for Afncan American students in G 9-12 science gate-keeping courses (Biology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics I)?  Has the number of students with SEM proficiency changed? How has the number of Afncan American students with SEM proficiency changed? (SEM proficiency is defined as students who have completed a minimum of pre-calculus, biology, and chemistry and/or physics courses).  What policy changes have promoted equal access by all students, including Afiican American students to high quality education?  What policy changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation?  What curriculum and instruction changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation?  What professional development policy and program changes were made to support teachers during CPMSA implementation?  What standards-based assessment system changes were made during CPMSA implementation? Method The evaluation design was based on quantitative student achievement data from over 100 examinations in twenty-four different assessment groups, which took place in LRSD from 1998 to 2003. The cooperative agreement with the NSF (Amendment No. 3) states that assessment data for the CPMSA Program for Years 3,4, and 5 will be used to determine annual increases in performance\nconsequently, the primary focus was on achievement data for SY 2000-2001,2001-2002, and 2002-2003. Literacy assessments were included along with mathematics and science assessments since literacy is a criticaliv achievement level or above the Proficient achievement level or both above Basic achievement level and above Proficient achievement level occurred for all students, for Caucasian students, and for African American students. The assessment groups are summarized below: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 English G8 EXPLORE English GIO PLAN Literacy G4 Benchmark Literacy G8 Benchmark Mathematics G4 Benchmark Mathematics G5 SAT-9 Mathematics G6 Benchmark Mathematics G7 SAT-9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Mathematics G8 Benchmark Mathematics G8 EXPLORE Mathematics GIO SAT-9 Mathematics GIO PLAN Algebra I G7-10 Benchmark Geometry G9-11 Benchmark Reading G5 SAT-9 Reading G7 SAT-9 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Reading G8 EXPLORE Reading GIO SAT-9 Reading GIO PLAN Science G5 SAT-9 Science G7 SAT-9 Science G8 EXPLORE Science GIO SAT-9 Science GIO PLAN 9 The Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Basic Achievement Level Table 32 shows only the change in percentage points of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level for all students in the District, for Caucasian students, and for African American students. Here we see that in 16 out of 24 assessments, the change in percentage points of African American students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was greater than the change in percentage points of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level. These results may be seen in Figure IS below. The Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Proficient Achievement Level Table 33 shows only the change in percentage points of students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level for all students in the District, for Caucasian students, and for African American students. Here we see that in 18 out of 24 assessments, the change in percentage points of African American students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was less than the change in percentage points of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level. These results may be seen in Figure 2S below. From the assessments in Tables 32 and 33, we conclude that, although there are increasing numbers of African American students at or above the Proficient achievement level, the greatest movement in African American student performance is upward from below the Basic achievement level into the region between the Basic achievement level and the Proficient achievement level. If the current momentum is maintained, student performance of African American students will continue to move upward to or above the Proficient achievement level. In the SMART/THRIVE 2002-2003 program, we found 52 percent of those students performing above the Basic achievement level but below the Proficient achievement level. With such a large number of students performing just below the Proficient achievement level, many more students could reach the Proficient achievement level with reasonable additional effort on the part of the students and teachers. From these data we conclude that the performance of African American students on district assessments improved substantially and consistently between 200land 2003.V Figure IS: Annual Change in Percentage Points Relative to the Basic Achievement Level Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Basic Achievement Level on 24 Different Assessments from SY 2000-2001 to SY 2002-2003 25 20 15 10 Caucasian Students A African American 5 0 , 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 12 13 14 15 16 20 21 23 24 -5 Figure 2S: Annual Change in Percentage Points Relative to the Proficient Achievement Level Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Proficient Achievement Level on 24 Different Assessments from SY 2000-2001 to SY 2002-2003 25 20 15 10 Caucasian Students African American 5 0 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 -5 12 13 14 15 16\\17 19 20 21 '23 24 0vi Course Enrollment and Completion from SY 1997-1998 to SY 2002-2003 1. The enrollment of African American students in Algebra I in the eighth grade increased by 29% and the successful completion rate (grade of A, B, or C) increased by 8% (Figure 51). The corresponding percentages for all students were a 17% increase in enrollment and 15% increase in successful completion rate (Figure 50). 2. The enrollment of African American students in mathematics gate-keeping courses (Alg I and II, Geo, Trig/Pre-Calc, and Cal) increased by 33% and the successful completion rate increased by 22% (Figure 49). The corresponding percentages for all students were a 28% increase in enrollment and 31% increase in successful completion rate (Figure 48). 3. The enrollment of African American students in science gate-keeping courses (Biology, Chemistry, and Physics) increased by 92% and the successful completion rate increased by 73% (Figure 53). The corresponding percentages for all students were an 84% increase in enrollment and an 85% increase in successful completion rate (Figure 52). 4. The percentage of African American students who were SEM proficient (completed physics, biology, chemistry and pre-calculus) increased by 50% Figure 61). The corresponding percentage for all students was a 31% increase in enrollment (Figure 60). From these data we conclude that the percentage increase of African American students in gatekeeping and higher-level mathematics and science courses is greater than that for students as a whole but that the successful completion rate (grade A, B, or C) for African American students is lower than that for students as a whole. Policy, Curriculum, and Professional Development Systemic improvement of mathematics and science in LRSD resulted from several factors. First, LRSD has adopted a number of Board Policies that promote the development of a coherent, consistent set of policies that supports: provision of high quality mathematics and science education for each student\nexcellent preparation, continuing education, and support for each mathematics and science teacher\nand administrative support for all persons who work to improve achievement among all students served by the system. Second, the alignment of written curriculum standards and benchmarks, nationally developed and validated curriculum materials, professional development, and assessment created a high quality mathematics and science curriculum. This alignment improved each year as data were used to check for strengths and weaknesses in the system. Another key factor was the coordination of resources, professional development, and technical assistance provided by Lead Teachers. Finally, the convergence of resources, both financial and human, fueled the change process that led to a higher- performing system. Student Support and Community Partners A variety of student support programs were implemented during the project period, including afterschool tutoring, the summer SMART program for rising eighth and ninth grade students preparing for Algebra I, the Saturday THRIVE program to provide follow-up support for SMART graduates, a preengineering program (SECME) that is in about half our schools, and after-school clubs sponsored by the Museum of Discovery. All of these programs focused on the needs of students who need support to improve their achievement. In addition community partners such as the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Philander Smith College, and the Museum of Discovery provided leadership and support to the LRSD mathematics and science programs. Parent Institutes, PTA meetings, and other avenues were used to involve parents and to try to keep them informed about changes in the LRSD math and science program. Curriculum packets designed to share the goals of each mathematics module, major classroom activities used to support those goals, and strategies for parents to utilize with their children at home were developed for each mathematics module for grades K-8. These packets were available for checkout through school libraries.vii Table of Contents Executive Summary........................................................................... Method................................................................................................................... Results.................................................................................................................... Achievement....................................................................................................... Course Emollment and Completion from SY 1997-1998 to SY 2002-2003 Policy, Curriculum, and Professional Development...................................... Student Support and Community Partners...................................................... 11 .ii iii hi vi vi vi 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Introduction...................................................................................................................................................1 Evaluation Goals:....................................................................................................................................................................3 Research Questions................................................................................................................................................................4 Current Status..........................................................................................................................................................................5 Major Milestones in the In^lementation of Educational System Reform through CPMSA by the Little Rock School District 6 2 Standards-Based Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.4.1 2.4.2 Mathematics and Science Curriculum Resources Evidence of Standards-based Instruction............. Professional Development..................................... Assessment System................................................ Benchmark Examinations Achievement Level Tests 2.5 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.5.3 2.5.4 Student Support SMART (Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training) THRIVE........................................................................................... SECME............................................................................................. After School Discovery Clubs....................................................... .9 10 11 11 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 19 3 Policy Support for High Quality Learning and Teaching 19 4 Convergence of Educational Resources 4.1 Personnel 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 Professional Development Special Population............ ESL............................. 4.2 4.3 Student Academic Support Programs Curricula Materials/Supplies............. 4.4 Integration of Technology 20 .20 .20 .20 .21 .21 .21 .21 5 Partnerships of Leadership\nBroad-Based Support 5.1 Parent/Family/Community Involvement.......................... 5.2 Primary Partners................................................................. 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 University of Arkansas at Little Rock Philander Smith College..................... Arkansas Museum of Discovery......... 21 .22 .22 .22 .22 .22viii 6 Measures of Effectiveness Focused on Student Outcomes 6.1 National Trends in Mathematics and Science Achievement 6.2 Determining Improvement from Changes in Percentages of Students Who Performed At or Above Different Achievement Levels............................................................................................................................................................. 23 .23 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.11.1 6.11.2 Mathematics Assessment in Grade 6 with the Arkansas Benchmark................................................................... Mathematics Assessment in Grade 4 and Grade 8 with the Arkansas Benchmark............................................ Literacy Assessments in Grade 4 and Grade 8 with the Arkansas Benchmark................................................... End-of-Course Assessments for Algebra I and Geometry.................................................................................... Mathematics Assessment in Grades 5,1, and 10 with the Stanford Achievement Test, 9\" Edition (SAT-9).. Science Assessment in Grades 5, 7, and 10 with the Stanford Achievement Test, 9* Edition (SAT-9).......... Total Reading Assessment in Grades 5, 7, and 10 with the Stanford Achievement Test, O* Edition (SAT-9) Discussion of the Assessment Summarized in Tables 1-16.............................................................................. EXPLORE Academic Assessment from ACT, Inc........................................................................................... English, Mathematics, Reading, and Science Reasoning Assessments in Grade 8 with EXPLORE........... Discussion of the S*\" Grade Assessments in English, Mathematics, Reading, and Science Reasoning with 25 26 30 34 38 43 48 52 57 58 59 EXPLORE Summarized in Tables 16-20 6.12 6.12.1 6.12.2 PLAN Academic Assessment from ACT, Inc............................................................................................................ English, Mathematics, Reading, and Science Reasoning Assessments in Grade 10 with PLAN.................... Discussion of the IO'*' Grade Assessments in English, Mathematics, Reading, and Science Reasoning with 61 63 63 6.13 PLAN Summarized in Tables 21-24. Advanced Placement Program. 66 67 7 Enrollment in Mathematics and Science Courses \u0026amp; Completion Trends 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.4.1 7.4.2 Enrollment and Completion in Mathematics Gate-Keeping Courses.... Enrollment and Completion in Science Gate-Keeping Courses............ Enrollment and Completion in All Mathematics and Science Courses Proficiency in Science, Engineering, and Mathematic (SEM).............. Enrollment and Completion in Pre-Calculus Enrollment and Completion in Biology........ 73 .73 .76 .78 .81 .81 .84 8 Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training (SMART)/Project Thrive 8.1  Population Configuration 8.2 Participant Selection. 8.3 Student Performance 86 .86 .86 .86 9 Improvement in the Achievement of All Students, Including those Historically Underserved. 90 Was the CPMSA program effective in improving the achievement of Afi-ican American students in the Little Rock School District?...............................................................................................................................................................................90 9.2 Have levels of achievement changed for all students and for Afncan American students from 1997-1998 to 2002- 2003?102 Have S\"\" grade enrollments in Algebra I and completion of that mathematics course with a grade of A, B, or C changed for all students and for Afncan American students from 1997-1998 to 2002-2003?.......................................... 9.3 9.4 Have enrollments in mathematics gate-keeping courses (Algebra I, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus) and conqrletion of those mathematics courses with a grade of A, B, or C changed for all students and Afncan American students in G 9-12?................................... ........ 103 9.5 104 Have enrollments in science gate-keeping courses (Biology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics 1) and completion of those science courses with a grade of A, B, or C changed for all students and for African American students in G 9-12? 104 9.6 Has the number of students with SEM proficiency changed? Has the number of Afncan American students with SEM proficiency changed? (SEM proficiency refers to students who have completed a minimum of pre-calculus, biology, and chemistry and /or physics courses with a grade of A, B, or C)....................................................................................... 9.7 What policy changes have promoted equal access by all students, including Afncan American students to high quality education?..................................................................................................................................................................... 9.8 What policy changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation?....................................................................................................................................................................... 104 105 1059.9 What curriculum and instruction changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation? 9.10 implementation? What professional development policy and program changes were made to support teachers during CPMSA 105 ix 9.11 What standards-based assessment system changes were made during CPMSA implementation? 105 105 10 Summary of Findings and Conclusion Conclusion............................................................. 106 .108 11 Index of Figures 109 12 Index of Tables 1111 An Evaluation of Mathematics and Science Programs in the Little Rock School District from 1998 to 2003 1 Introduction On September 13, 2002, Judge William Wilson, Sr., declared, after decades of litigation, the Little Rock School District to be Unitary (except in one area). The District Court issued its Memorandum Opinion (hereinafter Opinion) finding that the Little Rock School District (LRSD) had substantially complied with all areas of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (Revised Plan), with the exception of Revised Plan  2.7.1. Section 2.7.1 provided: LRSD shall assess the academic programs implemented pursuant to Section 2.7' after each year in order to determine the effectiveness of the academic programs in improving African-American achievement. If this assessment reveals that a program has not and likely will not improve Afiican-American achievement, LRSD shall take appropriate action in the form of either modifying how the program is implemented or replacing the program. The LRSD has participated in Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA), a National Science Program (NSF) since September 1, 1998. CPMSA was designed to improve the mathematics and science education of urban students in medium sized cities. NSF organized its systemic initiative program around six drivers that were found to be central to successful school reform. NSFs six drivers^ of systemic reform are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Standards-based curriculum, instruction, and assessment Policy support for high quality learning and teaching Convergence of educational resources Partnerships of leadership: broad-based support Measures of effectiveness focused on student outcomes Achievement of ALL students, including those historically underserved Thus, the Little Rock School District must provide evidence^ that clearly demonstrates that, to a significant degree, changes in student achievement and performance can be attributable to the catalytic impact of the systemic initiatives. The overall mission of the CPMSA program'* is to develop systemic approaches that will substantially increase the number of students enrolling in and successfully completing pre-college science, engineering and math (SEM) courses. This increased enrollment should have resulted in a quantifiable and long-term increase in the number of participating students who complete the \"college preparatory sequence of courses\" in secondary school, and then graduate to pursue undergraduate majors in science, engineering or mathematics. The national agenda^ is to produce more well-prepared high school graduates, both men and women, and to increase the number of students receiving B.S. degrees^ in natural sciences, engineering and 1 Revised Plan  2.7 provided, LRSD shall implement programs, policies and/or procedures designed to improve and remediate the academic achievement of African-American students, including but not limited to Section 5 of this Revised Plan. 2 NSF, Directorate of Education and Human Resources, Division of Educational System Reform, Six Critical Drivers, ( http://www.ehr.nsf gov/esr/drivcrs ') 3 Raising Standards and Achievement in Urban Schools: Case Stories from CPMSAs in Hamilton County/Chattanooga and Newport News Public Schools, Systemic Research, Inc., ( http://www.svstemic.com/). 4 CPMSA Fact Book 2002, May 2003 ( http://www.svstemic.com/), Systemic Research, Inc. 5 Report of the Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering and Technology Development, Land of Plenty: Diversity as America's Competitive Edge in Science, Engineering and Technology, Washington, D.C., September 2000.2 academic disciplines. Significant science proficiency by the nation^ will not be achieved unless all under-represented minorities, including Atncan Americans, are brought into the science and technology loop. In order to contribute to this national goal, the Little Rock School District proposed in the cooperative agreement with NSF that the graduation rate of well-prepared SEM high school graduates be substantially increased. As illustrated in Figurel and Figure 2, African American enrollment increases in both mathematics and science gate-keeping courses were achieved between the baseline year (in SY 1997-98, the year before the project was implemented) and Year 5 (SY 2002-2003). By the fifth year, 4,300 African American students (72% of total African American grade 8-12 enrollment) were enrolled in gate-keeping mathematics courses. In Figure 2, enrollments in science courses increased from 1,804 to 3,468 Afncan American students (51% of the total Afncan American grade 9-12 enrollment). Gate-keeping mathematics courses include Algebra I in 8* and 9* grades and higher. Algebra II, Geometry, Trigonometry/Pre-Calculus, and Calculus. The gate-keeping courses for science are Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. Figure 1: Enrollment in Mathematics Gate-Keeping and Higher Level Courses and Number of African American Students Who Completed Those Courses with a Grade of A, B, or C in the Little Rock School District Mathematics Gate-Keeping and Successful Completion Trends for African American Students (relative to total grades 8-12 African American population) 4,500 4,000 - Enrollment: 33% Increase 4,300 (72%) 0 c o S Vi c 3 c I 3,500  3,000 - 2,500 - ^\n52+ 1548 -3528 (55%) 8 I o o E 3 z 2,000 - 1,500- 1,000- 500 - (32%} r5  i,9gr Completion: 21% Increase  2,293 (38%) 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 c 0 T School Year Figure 1 and Figure 2 illustrate that course completion rates increased for African American students. Successful completion is defined as a student completing a course with a grade of C or better. Afncan 6 National Science Board, Science and Engineering lndicators-2002 and Data Brief, Division of Science Resource Statistics, National Science Foundation, April 2002. 7 Jackson, Shirley Ann,, The Quiet Crisis: Falling Short in Producing American Scientific and Technical Talent, BEST (Building Engineering \u0026amp; Science Talent), 40IB Street, Suite 2200, San Diego, CA 92101, 2003.3 American students completing mathematics courses increased 21% from 1,888 in SY 1997-98 to 2,293 in SY 2002-2003. As shown in Figure 2, science completion increased at a much higher 73% from 1,103 to 1,905. Figure 2: Enrollment in Science Gate-Keeping and Higher Level Courses and Number of African American Students Who Completed Those Courses with a Grade of A, B, or C in the Little Rock School District Science Gate-Keeping and Course Enrollment and Successful Completion Trends for African American Students (relative to total grades 9-12 African American population) 4,500 4,000 - Enrollment: 92% Increase 13 c o g c 8 c o E \u0026lt; c 3  \u0026lt; o .o  3 Z 3,500  3,000  2,500  2,000 - 1,500  (26%) e?m 3\n464 ^40t - 3468 (51%) 1,989 1,252 1,000 - (16%) 500 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 Completion: 73% Increase 1,905 (28%) 02-03 0 School Year u Evaluation Goals: 1. To demonstrate that a program assessment procedure is in place that can accurately measure the effectiveness of mathematics and science programs implemented in improving the academic achievement of African-American students. 2, To present achievement levels for the following student assessment data and years:  Grade 4  Grade 4  Grade 5  Grade 5  Grade 5  Grade 6  Grade 7  Grade 7  Grade 7  Grade 8  Grade 8  Grade 8 Arkansas Benchmark Mathematics (5 years) Arkansas Benchmark Literacy (5 years) SAT-9 Mathematics (6 years) SAT-9 Science (6 years) SAT-9 Total Reading (6 years) Arkansas Benchmark Mathematics (3 years) SAT-9 Mathematics (6 years) SAT-9 Science (6 years) SAT-9 Total Reading (6 years) Arkansas Benchmark Mathematics (5 years) Arkansas Benchmark Literacy (4 years) EXPLORE English (2 years)4 Grade 8 Grade 8 Grade 8 Grades 7-10 Grades 9-11 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grade 10 Grades 10-12 EXPLORE Mathematics (2 years) EXPLORE Reading (2 years) EXPLORE Science (2 years) End-of Course Algebra I (3 years) End-of Course Geometry (3 years) SAT-9 Mathematics (6 years) SAT-9 Science (6 years) SAT-9 Reading (6 years) PLAN English (2 years) PLAN Mathematics (2 years) PLAN Reading (2 years) PLAN Science (2 years) Advanced Placement (AP) examinations (6 years) In order to better understand these results, we will present enrollment and completion trends for all students and African American students from 1998 to 2003 using five (5) years of assessment data:  G 9-12 All students in mathematics gate-keeping courses: Algebra I \u0026amp; II, Geometry, Trig/Pre- Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus (relative to total students in G 9-12)  G 9-12 Afiican American students in mathematics gate-keeping courses: Algebra I \u0026amp; II, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus (relative to total Afncan American students in G 9-12)  G8 All students enrollment and completion in 8** grade Algebra I (relative to total students in G8)  G8 Afncan American students enrollment and completion in 8* grade Algebra I (relative to total Afncan American students in G8)  G 9-12 All students enrollment and completion in Pre-Calculus  G 9-12 Afncan American students enrollment and completion in Pre-Calculus  G 9-12 Enrollment and completion trends for all students in gate-keeping science courses\nBiology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics 1 (relative to total students in G 9-12)  G 9-12 Enrollment and completion trends for Afncan American students in science gate-keeping courses: Biology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics 1 (relative to total Afncan American students in G 9-12)  G 8-12 Enrollment and completion trends for Afncan American students in mathematics gatekeeping courses: Algebra I \u0026amp; II, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus (relative to total Afncan American students in G 8-12)  G 9-12 Enrollment and completion trends for Caucasian students in Biology  G 9-12 Enrollment and completion trends for Afncan American students in Biology  G 9-12 All students enrollment in all mathematics courses  G 9-12 All students completion in all mathematics courses  G 9-12 All students enrollment in all science courses  G 9-12 All students completion in all science courses 1.2 Research Questions In this study of mathematics and science programs, we will analyze assessment data from 1998 to 2003. We would like to answer the following questions for all students, and for Afncan American students in particular:  Was the CPMSA program effective in improving the achievement of Afncan American students?5  Have levels of achievement changed for all students and for African American students who perform at or above basic, at or above proficient, and at or above the advanced achievement level?  Have S* grade enrollments in Algebra 1 and completion trends changed for all students and for African American students?  Have the enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and Afncan American students in G 9-12 mathematics gate-keeping courses (Algebra I, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Calc., \u0026amp; Calculus)?  Have enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and for African American students in G 9-12 science gate-keeping courses (Biology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics 1)?  Has the number of students with SEM proficiency changed? How has the number of African American students with SEM proficiency changed? (SEM proficiency is defined as students who have completed a minimum of pre-calculus, biology, and chemistry and /or physics courses).  What policy changes have promoted equal access by all students, including Afncan American students to high quality education?  What policy changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation?  What curriculum and instruction changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation?  What professional development policy and program changes were made to support teachers during CPMSA implementation?  What standards-based assessment system changes were made during CPMSA implementation? In this report, we looked at assessments which took place during the LRSD program\nComprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA). The effective date of the CPMSA program was September 1, 1998, and the expiration date for this program was August 31, 2003. Additional information for the LRSD and individual schools is available from the Arkansas Department of Education website: httr)://www.as-is/reportcard/. 1.3 Current Status^ In the last Core Data Elements collection for the 2001-2002 school year, the Little Rock School District reported approximately 25,000 students, 35 elementary schools, eight middle schools, five high schools, one career and technical center, and one accelerated learning center (high school). The last strategic plan for the Little Rock School District (LRSD) overlapped with the CPMSA program. The mission statement of the LRSD was as follows: The mission of the LRSD is to equip all students with the skills and knowledge to realize their aspirations, to think critically and independently, to learn continuously and to face the future as productive, contributing citizens. This mission is accomplished through open access to a diverse, innovative and challenging curriculum in a secure environment with a staff dedicated to excellence and empowered with the trust and support of our community. The Little Rock CPMSA continues to be a catalyst for large-scale systemic change directed toward improving the science and mathematics achievement of all students. Major progress has been made in the development of an infrastructure to sustain achievement gains. The most visible change can be seen 8 Division of Instruction, Little Rock School District, Little Rock, Arkansas, Program Evaluations for the Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA). 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-01. and 2001-02. Funded by the National Science Foundation, Presented to the Board of Education for Approval, December 19, 2002. 9 Little Rock School District, A Vision for the Future Strategic Plan. 1998-2003.6 n the implementation of high quality standards-based curricula in mathematics and science for all K-12 itudents. ^ead Teachers continue to serve as the critical link between professional development and the mplementation of high quality standards-based curricula. They work to ensure that content and jedagogy obtained through professional development is apparent in daily classroom practice. Lead eachers provide evidence that is needed to make decisions regarding professional development. rior to 1999, the Districts assessment program consisted of the administration of the SAT-9 to grades i, 5, 7, 8, and 10, and the state Benchmark exam for mathematics and literacy to grades 4 and 8. In iddition, the PLAN and Explore, ACT, SAT, and AP exams were also administered. This system was lot meeting the needs of the District. Therefore, a revised assessment system was designed to monitor individual student growth in a single year and longitudinally, was developed and enacted beginning with the 1999-2000 school year. Results from data obtained from these tests have guided decisions regarding professional development and curriculum adjustments. Further impact of the CPMSA is evident in increased enrollment and success of students in upper level mathematics and science courses. Prior to 1999, high school seniors largely occupied physics classes in the Little Rock School Districts five high schools. One reason for this was the level and amount of mathematics required for students to learn traditional high school physics. As a result of a 1999 policy enacted by the Board of Directors of the Little Rock School District, all freshmen (ninth grade) students are required to enroll in a more conceptual physics course. Collaborations between the Little Rock School District and the University of Arkansas at Little Rock led to the development of graduate level courses for teachers desiring to receive physics endorsement required to teach the course. In the 1999- 2000 school year, enrollment in physics courses increased by more than ten times the previous year. In addition, the number of teachers qualified to teach physics increased from five (approximately one per high school) to an additional nineteen who completed the coursework required for a physics endorsement. The District experienced major increases in the enrollment and success of seventh and eighth grade students in Algebra I from 1999-2000 to 2001-2002 school year. One reason for this was the implementation of the Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training (SMART) Program. Critical skills for Algebra I were reinforced and enhanced during the two-week session through a variety of instructional strategies. Rising eighth and ninth grade students were invited to participate to improve their readiness for Algebra I and increase the overall enrollment. Much progress has been made toward the achievement of a single, standards-based, inquiry-centered, K- 12 mathematics and science education system as driven by the Little Rock CPMSA. The following report briefly describes the standards-based implementation organized around the four critical drivers and their impact on improved student achievement (drivers five and six). All fifty schools in the Little Rock School District have participated in and received direct initiative- supported services of the Little Rock CPMSA since its inception. More specifically, all teachers in all schools at identified grade levels participated in professional development programs aimed at the implementation of high quality curriculum in mathematics and science. All teachers in all classrooms at all fifty schools implemented revisions in the mathematics and science curricula. Therefore, all students were impacted directly by the CPMSA-sponsored services. J.4 Major Milestones in the Implementation of Educational System Reform through CPMSA by the Little Rock School District^ Table 1: Milestones in Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement I Baseline Year |  Little usage of standards-based instructional methods/materials\n10 Vanessa E. Cleaver, Project Director for the Little Rock School Districts NSF program: Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA), November 3,2003.7 1997-1998 Year 1 1998-1999 Year 2 1999-2000  Low numbers of students in advanced mathematics and science courses\n Graduation requirements allowed students to graduate without taking rigorous math and science courses\n District policies/practices were not standards-based\n District programs and resources were operated in isolation\n Professional development unfocused and inadequate_____________  Provided professional development for teachers in preparation for implementation of standards-based curricula for all students in the o o o o o following grade and subject levels: - 4\" and S' grade mathematics teachers 6' grade mathematics teachers 6*' grade science teachers 9' grade science teachers 1' - 5\" grade science teachers (1 module)  Small scale implementation of high-quality standards-based curricula  Major revisions made to the Districts policies and practices including the following: o o o o o o Enacted policy that established academic content standards/benchmarks for high school graduates\nPolicy requiring all curricula to be standards-based\nAll special curricula /programs must be aligned with Districts Strategic Plan\nRequirement to provide appropriate and equitable programs and services for ESL students to ensure achievement of standards and benchmarks\nProvided Pre-AP and AP courses in grades 6-12 ensuring no barriers to participate in programs\nEstablished graduation requirements that include 3 units of math to include algebra I. algebra II, and geometry and 3 units of science to include physics, biology and chemistry\n Leveraged four major funding sources in support of improving mathematics and science education\n Developed and disseminated a brochure describing the goals and objectives of the LR CPMSA\n Collaborated with the existing Arkansas Statewide Systemic Initiative (ASSI) to implement Family Math and Science programs in additional elementary and middle schools\n Established a partnership with University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) to provide training for pre-service and inservice teachers one week prior to a two-week institute for rising 5* and 6* grade students to improve their mathematics and science skills\n Partnership with Philander Smith College (PSC) to provide a summer institute for rising 9*^ grade students for success in Algebra I\n Partnership with UALR to provide college credit for 18 LRSD teachers to complete coursework required for them to receive an endorsement in Physics  Fully implemented high-quality standards-based instruction in math for all students in grades 4, 5, and 6\n Fully implemented high quality standards-based instruction in science for all students in grades 6 and 9\nPartial implementation of high quality standards-based instruction/materials for all students in grades 1-5\n Provided more than 31,890 teacher-hours of professional development for K-12 mathematics and science teachers focused primarily on the use of hands-on, inquiry-based approach to teaching math and/or science\n Lead teachers made more than 2,551 technical assistance contacts with classroom teachers\n District adopted an Assessment Plan that involved multiple norm- and 8 criterion-referenced measures across grade levels that provided corroborative evidence necessary to accurately document outcomes of CPMSA initiatives\n Implemented SMART Program (Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training), a two-week summer program, to rising S** and 9'*' grade students preparing for enrollment in Algebra I\n Provided Project THRIVE, a Saturday academy, in collaboration with Philander Smith College as a follow-up component of SMART. Students participated in eight Saturday sessions on the campus of PSC\n Provided additional student support programs in collaboration with the Arkansas Museum of Discovery, University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR), and University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS)\n Enacted policies requiring the following\no o o Preparation of an individual student academic improvement plan for students not performing at the proficient level in English language arts and mathematics\nAddition of two more credit requirements for graduation class of 2003 and beyond including Recommended Curriculum which includes four years of mathematics and science and two years of technology courses\nAddition of dual-credit courses with UALR in Physics II and Pre-calculus to the University Studies program at Hall High School for the 2000-2001 school year\nYear 3 2000-2001  Approximately 30% of the Districts Title I funds were allocated for mathematics and science in the areas of professional development, instructional materials, student academic support, and salary\n SMART continued to provide support for students entering Algebra I\n Project THRIVE, a Saturday academy, offered for students enrolled in Algebra I________________________________________________  Full implementation of high quality standards-based instruction/materials in math for all students in grades 2-8\n Continued partial implementation of high quality standards-based instruction/materials in science for all students in grades 1-5\nfull implementation of standards-based instruction/materials in science for all students in grades 6, 7 and 9\n High quality standards-based instruction/materials fully implemented in high school math for all students in Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, and Pre-calculus\n Continued full implementation of high quality standards-based instruction/materials for all students in high school Active Physics, and Chemistry in the Community (CHEMCOM)\n Lead teachers continued to provide technical assistance to teachers in the classrooms\n Professional development shifted towards a focus on specific needs such as content knowledge, a variety of instructional strategies, and alternative assessment practices\n SMART /Project THRIVE served more than 200 students in Algebra I\n Implementation of Riverdeep Interactive Software in all high schools for students in Algebra I\n Enacted policy and guidelines for all certified employees to obtain the required 30 hours of professional development annually - including 6 in instructional technology\n Voters in Little Rock approved an annual $4,000,000 dedicated maintenance fund for technology and infrastructure\n District leveraged resources to purchase laptop computers for each math/science lead teacher to help them maintain accurate records of classroom visits and observations\n Increased the availability and use of technology including graphing calculators\n Collaborated with University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) to 9 develop and offer college courses based on the needs of the District\nYear 4 2001-2002 Year 5 2002-2003  Full implementation of high quality standards-based instruction/materials in math and science for all students in grades K- 9\n High school mathematics courses (Algebra I - Pre-calculus) were revised to reflect a closer alignment with the national and state standards and frameworks\n Professional development continued to be paramount to successful implementation of standards-based instruction\n District leveraged support of professional development for all math and science teachers by providing funds to pay substitute teachers and stipends for teachers receiving trainings\n Lead teachers continued to provide technical assistance inside and outside the classroom by conducting professional development workshops and classroom observations\n Revised and enacted procedures for ensuring that students who are Limited English Proficient (LEP) achieve the curriculum content standards and benchmarks established by the State of Arkansas and LRSD\nSt  Leveraged support of three major funding sources, LRSD, 21 Century Community LEADERS2 grant, and the City of Little Rock Education Commission, to expand the SMART Program\n Project THRIVE offered as a followup for students enrolled in Algebra 1\n Continued partnership with University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) to develop and offer graduate courses based on the needs of the District\n Developed and distributed pacing guides for secondary mathematics and science courses to address the issue of student mobility within the District\n Full implementation of high quality standards-based curricula for all students, grades K-12, in mathematics and science\n Common labs developed for physics, biology, and chemistry\n Lead teachers continued to provide professional development and monitor implementation of standards-based curricula\n Professional development more focused and data-driven for all K-12 math and science teachers\no o Horizontal and vertical teams continued to meet\nPilot lesson study group began with 16 teachers representing four elementary schools - Two cycles competed\n SMART and Project THRIVE continue to provide support for students enrolled in Algebra I\n Continued to leverage District, Title I and 21 Century Grant resources to support and improve mathematics and science\n____ 2 Standards-Based Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment 11 The Little Rock School District implemented a high quality, standards-based curriculum in grades K-12 in both mathematics and science. The curriculum was described in the districts Curriculum Standards and Benchmarks and was aligned with the Arkansas Mathematics and Science Frameworks, which in turn based on the NCTM and NSES standards. The mathematics and science standards were were correlated to the major assessments used by the district and were supported by intensive and prolonged 11 Little Rock School District, Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement, Annual Progress Report, 2001-2002.10 irofessional development. The curriculum support materials included many nationally recognized esources that were specifically developed to address national standards in mathematics and science. ^ead Teachers provided support in the form of classroom-based technical assistance, professional ievelopment, joint planning, demonstration teaching and team teaching for all schools. Lead Teachers ierved as the link between professional development and classroom practice to help ensure that the content and pedagogy included as professional development became actualized in the classroom. Classroom teachers developed a K-12 alignment that adhered to the philosophy that fewer topics addressed in greater depth should be targeted for each grade level. The teachers, working with Lead Teachers and the Mathematics and Science Department developed pacing guides to promote more uniformity in curriculum and instruction across schools. This same group developed criterion- referenced tests (CRTs) for administration at the end of each math and science module to provide a formative measure of how well students learned the content and skills in the curriculum. The CRTs had embedded items that were patterned after the high-stakes Arkansas Benchmark Exams, the Achievement Level Tests, and the Stanford-9 Achievement Test. Systemic improvement of mathematics and science in the district resulted from several factors. First, the alignment of the written standards and benchmarks, nationally developed and validated curriculum materials, professional development, and assessment created high quality math and science curricula. This alignment improved each year as data were used to check for strengths and weaknesses in the system. Another key factor was the coordination of resources, professional development, and technical assistance provided by the Lead Teachers. Finally, the convergence of resources, both financial and human, fueled the change process that led to a higher-performing system. 2.1 Mathematics and Science Curriculum Resources Nationally developed and validated curriculum resources were utilized at most grade levels/courses. Locally developed materials also supported the curriculum. Major revisions of the high school mathematics and science curriculum occurred in SY 2001-02. Curricula were developed for each high school course (Algebra I - Pre-Calculus) reflecting the alignment with national and state standards and frameworks. In addition, high-quality activities were integrated to encourage teachers to use more hands-on, minds-on strategies to bring real-world experiences to the classroom. The following table contains a list of resource materials which were used at each grade level in mathematics and science. Table 2: Curriculum Resources for Mathematics and Science GradeLeveVSubject Kindergarten First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Seventh Eighth Algebra 1, regular and Mathematics Resources______________ Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Investigations in Number, Data and Space Connected Mathematics Connected Mathematics Connected Mathematics (The College Boards Pre-AP training) and Science Resources Integrated Thematic Units developed by each teacher Science and Technology for Children_________________ Science and Technology for Children_________________ Science and Technology for Children_________________ Science and Technology for Children_________________ Science and Technology for Children__________ Science and Technology for Children_________________ Science and Life Issues (S ALI) Science Interactions\n* Issues, Evidence and You (lEY)_____11 Pre-AP Geometry, regular and Pre-AP Algebra 2, regular and Pre-AP Pre-Calculus, regular and Pre-AP Statistics, regular and AP Calculus, AP Physics, regular and Pre- AP Biology, regular and Pre- AP Chemistry, regular and Pre-AP AP Biology AP Environmental Science AP Chemistry AP Physics Pacesetter Mathematics with Meaning', Algebra 1 - An Integrated Approach (The College Boards Pre-AP training) and Pacesetter Mathematics with Meaning', Geometry - An Integrated Approach__________________ (The College Boards Pre-AP training) Algebra 2 - An Integrated Approach__________________ The College Boards Pacesetter Pre-Calculus', Pre-Calculus____________________________ The College Boards AP Materials\nThe Practice of Statistics_____________________________ The College Boards AP Materials\nCalculus Active Physics', Conceptual Physics Holt Biology- Principles and Explorations\nHolt Modem Biology____________________ Chemistry in the Community (ChemCom)\nMerrill Chemistry The College Boards AP Materials\nCampbells Biology The College Boards AP Materials\nLiving in the Environment_______________ The College Boards AP Materials\nChemistry - The Central Science_____________ The College Boards AP Materials\nPhysics: Principles with Applications ( 1' 2.2 Evidence of Standards-based Instruction Much of the professional development provided for teachers focused on those teaching strategies and techniques that support teaching the standards. The use of standards-based pedagogy in the mathematics and science classrooms is an important factor in improving student achievement in mathematics and science. Several data gathering tools are used to follow-up to determine if standards-based pedagogy included in professional development are taking root in the classroom. First, Lead Teachers assigned to all the districts schools visit classrooms and report their observations. These observations are recorded on a classroom observation checklist. Second, teachers were surveyed after the 2001-02 school year to self-report how well prepared they were to implement strategies consistent with standards-based instruction. Third, at selected middle schools and all high schools, students were asked to report on the strategies used by their teachers in mathematics and science classes. 2.3 Professional Development * rofessional development is a major strategy used by all NSF Urban Systemic Initiative (USI) Sites and supported by a variety of district policies. The primary aims of professional development activities are to improve teachers content knowledge, pedagogic skills for inquiry-based teaching, and methods of ^sessing student learning. For example, basic classroom management skills are an essential part of teaching and should be mastered. Courses to improve teachers content knowledge of both mathematics12 and science are important. Thus mathematics and science teachers benefit from calculus-based physics courses. According to the Board of Education of the Little Rock School District policy professional development means a coordinated set of planned learning activities for teachers and administrators which are standards-based and continuous. Professional development will result in individual, schoolwide, and system-wide improvement designed to insure that all students demonstrate proficiency on the state academic standards. Approved professional development will be linked to the schools improvement plan, demonstrate research-based best practice, and be subject-specific and site-specific as often as possible. As per Arkansas State Board of Education regulations, all certified employees of the Little Rock School District will complete a minimum of 30 required approved hours of professional development annually, six of which must be in instructional technology^. Additional statements concerning professional development are available from the Arkansas Department of Education and the Arkansas Professional Development Council'. Information about licensure for public school teachers and administrators is available from the Arkansas Department of Education'  . Figure 3 illustrates the certification trends of grades 6 to 12 mathematics and science teachers. In this figure, the percentage of teachers certified for the subject, that she or he teaches, is shown. Figure 4 below illustrates the number of teachers that have been designated: Job Not Certified. They may be certified to teach some subject, but it is not in the subject which she or he teaches. These certification data were obtained from the Little Rock School District Annual Accreditation Reports, which are released by the Arkansas Department of Education. They confirm the need for more efforts to obtain qualified middle school mathematics teachers and qualified high school science teachers for the subjects which they are teaching. Figure 3: Certification Trends for Grade 6-12 Mathematics and Science Teachers ij' 'i V! tiiil I Ij i: I 1 ? iW ,1 I' fl 112 J r i' Rock School District, Professional Development, NEPN Code: lAA. . Arkansas Department of Education, Regulations Governing Professional Development. Arkansas Professional Development Council, Arkansas Professional Development Standards, May 2002. Arkansas Department of Education, Office of Professional Quality Enhancement and Office of Professional Licensure, fnifucrion for Public School Teachers and Administrators: A Reference Handbook, August 2003. Web address for Office of Professional Licensure: http:/7arkedu.state.ar.us/teachers/index.htmltf traditional. JI 100% T 93% 96% 93% 90% 90% - 96% ^1% 13 80% - 91% !6% i4% 82%  .C S 70% - 60% - 50% - Math f 4\nu yO 40% - 30% - 20% - 10% -- 0% 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 00-02 Science 00-03 I: 11 % I + + + + + Figure 4: Number of Grade 6-12 Mathematics and Science Teachers: Job Not Certified 99 Number of Mathematics and Science Teachers \"Job Not Certified\" 25\n25 li 20 I I 16 15 10 6 I 4 4 nil lJijI III 11 .11  Middle School Math  High School Math  Middle School Science  High School Science i] i i 1 6 ) r I 5 0 1997-98 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 I I I I Figures 5, 6, and 1, illustrate the degree to which professional development participation has grown since 1997-1998. In 2002-2003, 21 teachers had less than 60 hours, whereas in 2000-2001, 70 teachers had less than 60 hours. In 2000-2001, 39 teachers had between 60 and 120 hours, but in 2002-2003, 54 teachers had between 60 and 120 hours. In 2000-2001, 3 teachers had between 120 and 200 hours, but in 2002-2003,29 teachers had between 120 and 200 hours. In 2000-2001, one teacher had over 200 ours, but in 2002-2003, 9 teachers had over 200 hours. 1114 Figure 5: Professional Development Participation Trends for Grade 6-12 Mathematics Teachers PD Participation 120-r 100- .s o V .o S 3 z 80- 60- 40- 20-  PO200  120\u0026lt;FD\u0026lt;200 0 60\u0026lt;PD\u0026lt;120  Ptxeo  I 0 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 School Year Figure 6: Professional Development Participation Trends for Grade 6-12 Science Teachers P.D. Participation 120t 100- H e 80   FO200 S o u .s E 60- 40- 20- k,-\nl  120\u0026lt;PD\u0026lt;200 0 60\u0026lt;FD\u0026lt;120  PD\u0026lt;60 3 z 0 11 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 School Year Figure 1'. Professional Development Participation Trends for Grade K-5 Mathematics and Science Teachers700 T 600-- P.D. Participation 15 A' i\",- 12 V  S * b E 3 Z 500 - 400-- 300 -  PO200  120\u0026lt;PD\u0026lt;200 a 60\u0026lt;PD\u0026lt;120  pcxeo 200 - 100-- ol 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 I I I ba-Bl School Year In SY 2001-2002, professional development was a key component of the districts efforts to improve the mathematics and science programs^. Additional funds to support professional development were provided from three major sources: 1) Dwight D. Eisenhower Program, 2) Safe Schools/Healthy Students Grant, and 3) Little Rock School District Substitute Teacher Budget. Most notable among these was the districts willingness to transfer the funds included in the substitute teacher budget to the Mathematics and Science Department for use in paying stipends to teachers for training during the summer. Professional development for teachers in years one and two of the CPMSA Project was initially directed ^ward module-specific content and pedagogy (e.g., training on how to teach the CMP module Bits and leces). During years three and four, module-specific training was provided for new curriculum modules that were added\nhowever, training began to shift toward a focus on specific needs that were ' entified in years one and two. Content-based university courses were offered, various teaching strategies were studied in greater depth, high-level implementers were utilized as leaders of professional evelopment, and alternative assessment practices were examined. Study groups, vertical teams, and onzontal teams met to focus on strategies for improving student learning. For example, the average number of hours of professional development during year four and the primary topics of professional evelopment are listed in the chart below. Table 3: Professional Development for Mathematics and Science Teachers Grade Level/ Course Number of Teachers Hours 2000-2001 Professional Development Topics 105 32 hrs Grade 1 Grade? 100 56 hrs 131 53 hrs Specific training on each Investigations module (content and pedagogy) Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program for new teachers. University of Arkansas at Little Rock graduate courses: Investigations in Geometry and Investigations in Rational Numbers K Little Rock School District, Little Rock Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement, Annual ---------- UVIIUUI rogress Report, 2001-2002.1 16 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Science Grade 7 Science Grade 8 Science Grade 6 Mathematics Grade 7 Mathematics Grade 8 Mathematics Physics Biology Chemistry Algebra 1 Algebra 2 Geometry Trigonometry \u0026amp; Pre- Calculus_____ Calculus and Statistics Total Training hours from 124 82 84 21 17 17 20 18 20 20 19 14 22 24 24 15 12 889 56 hrs 40 hrs 46 hrs 24 hrs 42 hrs 42 hrs 25 hrs 6 hrs 24 hrs 24 hrs 24 hrs 24 hrs 86 hrs 23 hrs 86 hrs 23 hrs 23 hrs August 2001 to June 2002. Specific training on each Science and Technology for Children module (content and pedagogy) Operation Primary Physical Science (OPPS) is a physical science content-based training through Louisiana State University Training on Science and Life Issues (SALI) (content and pedagogy) Training on Issues, Evidence and You (lEY) (content and pedagogy) Content and pedagogy training on Oceans and Weather from Its About Time Publishers Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program for new teachers Alternative Assessment Training Using Rubrics The College Board Pre-AP workshop training_______________ Specific training on each Connected Mathematics Project (CMP) module (content and pedagogy) Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program for new teachers CMP Users Conference in East Lansing, MI The College Board Pre-AP workshop training Graduate level physics courses offered through UALR Week-long training in ChemCom offered through the American Chemical Society and W. H. Freeman Collaborative Learning Student Research Seminar The College Board Pre-AP and AP workshop training Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program for new teachers______ The College Board Pacesetter Mathematics with Meaning training for Algebra 1 and geometry The College Board Pacesetter Pre-Calculus Through Modeling training TI Online training for Algebra 1 The College Board Pre-AP workshop training Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program for new teachers Specific training on the curriculum resources (standards, benchmarks, pacing guide, assessment, activities) for each course 'it 1 h'.' ji if- * I I 1* ' I'' 1 I '5 I 'tUi Special populations of people who received training during project year four included\nprincipals and other administrators, new teachers, parents, and the lead teachers. Following is a brief description of the professional development provided for each of these groups. Ci\nt, I -rincipals and other Administrators - Principals and other administrators received training in several Ways. First of all, a curriculum day sponsored by the Division of Curriculum and Instruction was an annual event that focused on curriculum issues. This event over the past several years had been used to talk about systemic change in math and science. Principals and administrators attended concurrent sessions related to the new math and science programs before the programs were implemented in the district. Second, principals participated in PIP (Priority Intervention Procedures) cluster meetings with curriculum staff. The staff and principals discussed how to foster school improvement in literacy, math, ^d science. These meetings preceded the submission of the annual school improvement plans from every school. Third, principals met regularly during the school year in cluster groups for professional II J17 development. Fourth, principals learned about the math and science modules by attending professional development sessions for teachers or through training-on-the-spot by the Lead Teacher assigned to their buildings. These efforts helped to provide extended professional development for principals in the systemic change that their schools were experiencing. _ ew Teachers  New teachers participated in an intensive professional development program over the course of their first year of teaching. Module-specific training in mathematics and/or science was provided to quickly prepare new teachers to teach the curriculum. In addition, each new teacher was assigned a mentor teacher. The mentor teacher was equipped through the Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program training to assist the new teachers in a variety of ways. Parents - Parents had opportunities to attend training at school-based Parent Teacher Association meetings that would give them an overview of the math and science programs and answer their questions and concerns and to participate with their children in Family Math and Science nights where they would get a more in-depth look at the math and science programs by actually participating in standards-based math and science activities. For example, two Parent Institutes were held during the 200L2002 school year. Parents had an opportunity to participate in a variety of sessions including sessions about the math and science curriculum and District testing. The District cable channel also broadcast programs that pertained to the math and science programs. Lead Teachers - Lead teachers and other members of the CPMSA staff participated in an average of 68 ours of professional development during year four. The professional development of lead teachers can be grouped into several categories:  Content training  Program-specific training (Investigations, Science and Technology for Children, Connected Mathematics, SEPUP, ChemCom, etc.)  Pedagogy  Workshop Leader  Mentoring  Systemic Change in Math and Science  Assessment  Technology  ESL (English as a second language)  Classroom Management Each Lead Teacher completed the Arkansas Pathwise Mentoring Program training that trained them to OnCprVA llAW ____________  o o o observe new teachers, recognize performance on 19 criteria, provide written summaries of a teachers  J . ~ waix/v/ \u0026gt; VlilVllA) Wllllvll oUIlUllc rmance an provide suggestions for the continued development of the teacher. 2.4 Assessment System LRSD School Board in August 1999 continued to guide r ion 0 outcomes. Corroborative evidence across multiple norm and criterion referenced measures included the familiar SAT-9 and EXPLORE TLAN cnchmark Exam and Achievement Level Tests (ALT), increased the accuracy and p siveness of documentation. Features of the Benchmark, SAT-9, EXPLORE, and PLAN assessments are summarized for better understanding in this report. and PLAN assessments. Less familiar 2.4.1 Benchmark Examinations f f grades 4, 6, and 8, they provide percentages of students in each of r per ormance eve s. advanced, proficient, basic, and below basic. Test items include multiple- c oice an open response questions on grade level standards and benchmarks from The Arkansas Test items include multiple- I18 Mathematics, Reading, and English/Language Arts Curriculum Frameworks. Grade appropriate items are developed with the assistance and approval of the Arkansas Department of Mathematics Content Advisory Committee composed of active Arkansas educators with expertise in mathematics. Percentile scores allow comparison by grade level to test takers statewide. 2.4.2 Achievement Level Tests These assessments are administered in May in grades 2-8, and they provide RIT (Rasch Unit) scale scores for both mathematics and science. Test items, also aligned with standards and benchmarks in the aforementioned Arkansas Curriculum Frameworks, are selected from a pool of items from the test development company by a balance (race, gender, grade level) of District math and science teachers and curriculum specialists. RIT scale scores show a students current achievement level along the curriculum scale and allow comparison by grade level to ALT test takers nationwide - currently a group of 104 school districts with 500,000 students that grows four to thirteen points annually. Locally developed Criterion-Referenced Tests (CRTs) were administered quarterly for Algebra I and II, Geometry and Trigonometry. End-of-module CRTs were administered across the elementary and middle school grade levels. Results were used locally to define additional professional development and instructional strategies. 2.5 Student Support Daily teaching and learning experiences in the classroom must be oriented toward high content standards, must convey high learning expectations for diverse groups of students, and must promote a connection among schools, homes, and communities. Learning must be reinforced and supplemented with appropriate out-of-school activities. The following is a list of services provided for the students in the Little Rock School District at various times throughout the school year. Students who participated in the following programs were closely monitored to measure impact. 2.5.1 SMART (Summer Mathematics Advanced Readiness Training) SMART is a two-week summer program for rising eighth and ninth grade students preparing for enrollment in Algebra I. In 2001-2002, a total of 278 students completed the program. SMART is designed to prepare students for success in Algebra I, and to motivate them to continue their education in the areas of mathematics and science. One hundred (100) Afiican American and Hispanic rising 8* grade students were identified based on their spring ALT score and grades in mathematics as having the potential to be successful in Algebra I as 8* graders. These students were invited to participate in SMART and the follow-up program. An added feature of SMART 2002 was the integration of the Riverdeep Interactive software. Students who participated in SMART 2002 were invited to participate in Project THRIVE during the 2002-2003 school year. Project THRIVE is a Saturday academy for students currently enrolled in Algebra I. (See additional information about SMART in Outputs and Outcomes Section) 2.5.2 THRIVE Project THRIVE is a Saturday academy provided in collaboration between Philander Smith College (PSC) and the Little Rock School District. Students who participated in SMART 2001 and enrolled in Algebra I participated in 12 Saturday sessions facilitated by LRSD teachers and PSC undergraduate mentors. In 2001-2002, the program served 141 students. 2.5.3 SECME SECME is a pre-engineering program that is currently active in nearly half of the schools in the Little Rock School District. Students compete locally in various events, such as mousetrap car design, essay, banner design, and bridge building, to win the opportunity to compete on the national level. The University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) College of Information Science and Systems Engineering19 served as the primary partner for SECME. They hosted local events as well as provided technical assistance to school coordinators. 2.5.4 After School Discovery Clubs After School Discovery Clubs, a partnership between the Little Rock School District and the Arkansas Museum of Discovery, was designed to increase students interest and knowledge in science. During the 2001-2002 school year. After School Discovery Clubs were established in each middle school as a part of the extended day program that provided structured activities for students. Students participated in hands-on activities facilitated by a Museum of Discovery educator. Each semester culminated with a visit to the Museum of Discovery. The program served 329 students during the 2001-2002 school year. The Districts Safe Schools/Healthy Students grant provided funding for the 2001-2002 After School Discovery Clubs. 3 Policy Support for High Quality Learning and Teaching This driver for educational system reform promotes the development of a coherent, consistent set of policies that supports: provision of high quality mathematics and science education for each student\nexcellent preparation, continuing education, and support for each mathematics and science teacher (including all elementary teachers)\nand administrative support for all persons who work to dramatically improve achievement among all students served by the system. Since the LRSD conducted an intensive review and revision of its policies and regulations during 1998-99, few changes have been necessary. The following is a summary of policy revisions that have occurred since fall 2001: Table 4: Little Rock School District Policy Revisions Effective Fall 2001 NEPN Code lAA lAA-R IBA ID-R IHBEA, IHBEA- R IHCDA-R IKC-R IKEC-Rl IKEC-R3 Title__________________ Professional Development Professional Development Waivers Student Schedules English As A Second Language Concurrent Enrollment Class Rankings/Grade-Point Averages Credit for College Dual-Credit Courses and College Summer Enrichment Programs Credit By Examination Purpose___________________________________________ Established formal policy linking professional development to expectations for improved student achievement.________ Established procedures for various professional development programs.______________________________ Established a policy to consider waivers from certain waivers to improve student achievement.________________ Established minimum time required for instruction of each subject area grades PreK-8.___________________________ Revised procedures and guidelines for ensuring that students who are limited-English- proficient (LEP) achieve the curriculum content standards and benchmarks established by the State of Arkansas and the Little Rock District.___________________________________________ Revised procedures for students to enroll concurrently in high school and in an area college or university for college credit only.________________________________________ Revised procedures and guidelines for calculating gradepoint average and rank in class. Regulations for determining grade-point average and rank in class for students who transfer to the Little Rock District are defined in this policy.______________________________________ Revised procedures that allow students to receive high school credit for courses taken at the college level contingent upon obtaining prior approval from the Associate Superintendent for Instruction\ndocumentation of successful completion of the college program is presented to the school registrar._______________________________ Revised guidelines for high school students to recover credit lost due to failure by participating in the credit by20 KF IMH-AD General Education Graduation Requirements Class Interruptions examination program______________________________ Establishes revised graduation requirements including requirements for transfer students and procedures for earning specialty seals or diplomas.__________________ Established guidelines to limit interruptions to classroom instruction. 4 Convergence of Educational Resources Systemic reform demands realignment of resources to support the instructional goals as expressed by high-quality mathematics and science standards adopted by the Little Rock School District. Funding provided by the Little Rock CPMSA is intended to be a catalyst for the mathematics and science education reform effort. Using 2001-2002 as representative school year, local, state and federal funds and resources supporting mathematics and science efforts were leveraged and allocated to reinforce an articulated, coherent, and unitary program of high-quality mathematics and science for all students. Approximately 30% of the Districts Title I funds ($1,229,336) were used to enhance mathematics and science instruction in elementary and middle schools in the areas of professional development, purchase of instructional materials, and salaries for personnel. The following is an illustration of how leveraged resources were used to support the activities outlined in the LR CPMSA strategic plan: 4.1 Personnel Mathematics and science Lead Teachers for elementary, middle and high school help facilitate the implementation of high quality standards-based mathematics and science curricula in the classroom. Local and federal funds were leveraged to support this effort. Funding for the mathematics and science project support staff (not supported by NSF funds) along with one-half of the NSF evaluator totaled $467,828. This amount was obtained from the Class-Size Reduction Allocation, Title VI Funds, Local District funds, Dwight D. Eisenhower Fund, and Safe Schools/Healthy Students grant. In addition, the principal investigator and two co-principal investigators provided in-kind contributions to oversee the management and implementation of the plan. Services of three state math specialists were donated as in-kind contributions to provide technical support to teachers as well as to conduct professional development activities for LRSD teachers. 4.1.1 Professional Development District funds were leveraged to release a mathematics teacher for one-half day (2-3 days per week) to serve as district coordinator for the mathematics vertical team. As a result of this addition to the project staff, a newsletter is published quarterly and meetings are held monthly after school to facilitate coherence within the 6-12 mathematics curriculum. Local, state, and federal funds are necessary to provide ongoing professional development that is critical for systemic reform in mathematics and science. The Dwight D. Eisenhower funds were used to provide opportunities for mathematics and science teachers to participate in professional development activities and to offset expenses for training materials. A major portion of District funds were also leveraged to provide substitutes, stipends, or release time for mathematics and science teachers who participate in the ongoing training required for effective implementation of the mathematics and/or science curriculum. Graduate level content-based courses were offered through the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) for elementary, middle, and high school mathematics teachers. Tuition support was provided by LRSD, a UALR grant, and LR CPMSA. 4.1.2 Special Population The basic premise of the Little Rock CPMSA is that all students Pre-K - 12 should be afforded intellectually challenging and appropriate curricula, supported by adequate educational resources, and taught by appropriately trained teachers. The Division of Instruction, which encompasses the Division for Exceptional Children along with the mathematics and science department, has been the driving force for creating a unitary program to improve mathematics and science for all students. All mathematics21 and science training sessions, along with all other core content area training, have included modifications for students classified in the following areas: 504, Special Education, Gifted and Talented Education, Limited English Proficiency, and Title 1. Self-contained special education teachers participated in mathematics and science training sessions that provided an overview of the curriculum and implementation strategies for self-contained students. In addition, collaborative efforts between the Mathematics/Science Department and the Special Education Department resulted in the acquisition of instructional materials/equipment for self-contained classrooms. 4.1.3 ESL An ongoing comprehensive professional development program was offered for all teachers who work with Limited-English Proficient students. The program was composed of two distinct parts. The first part was the ESL endorsement program that was organized in conjunction with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. The second part of the professional development program maintained the same focus as the first part but was designed to accommodate larger numbers of teachers. For example, during the 2001-02 school year, 47 elementary and secondary teachers completed coursework required for an ESL endorsement. Of those, 68 percent (32) taught mathematics and/or science. Title I, class size reduction, state grant, and District resources were used to fund these activities. 4.2 Student Academic Support Programs In SY 2001-2002, more than $115,267 was leveraged by local, federal, and private funding agencies for Student Academic Support Programs. The following table describes the resources leveraged in support of each activity: Activity___________ After School Discovery Clubs SMART 2002 Cost $15,240 Funding Sonrce(s)_____________ Safe Schools/Healthy Students grant $100,027 21 Century Community LEADERS2 LR CPMSA Riverdeep Interactive Software (provided site license for use of mathematics software) 4.3 Curricula Materials/Supplies The Little Rock School District is committed to providing high quality standards based mathematics and science instruction for all students. More than $ 180,000 was allotted for the purchase of instructional and refurbishment materials for mathematics and science classrooms. 4.4 Integration of Technology All certified personnel in the Little Rock School District are required to complete thirty hours of professional development per year. Six of those hours must be in instructional technology. Technology was integrated throughout most of the professional development activities for mathematics and science teachers. Requirements for graduation include at least all students. one unit of credit in technological applications for 5 Partnerships of Leadership: Broad-Based Support An infrastructure of partnerships that strongly supports systemic change in mathematics and science education is a critical piece of the Little Rock CPMSA. For example, a comprehensive effort was made during the 2001-2002 school year to maximize the broad-based support of key stakeholders. The LR CPMSA Governing Board met to oversee the development of the goals, the implementation of the activities, and the assessment of outcomes. J22 Systemic change continues to be an ongoing cycle of collaborations between the learning communities of the Little Rock School District to improve student achievement in mathematics and science. Lead teachers, for example, help lead systemic reform by providing on-going technical assistance and support to teachers in their individual schools. Change, as directed by the LR CPMSA project staff, supports school improvement and district improvement efforts. The cycle is complete with the support of senior District persormel, principals, parents and community, institutions of higher learning, and of course, all K-12 mathematics and science teachers. 5.1 Parent/Family/Community Involvement For example, two Parent Institutes were held during the 2001-2002 school year. More than 150 people attended each institute that featured sessions on curriculum, assessment, graduation requirements, and how to help students at home. Local elementary school PTA meetings and special called parent/family meetings served as a means for keeping parents and family members apprised of the Districts mathematics and science program. Lead teachers, in collaborations with principals and teachers, provided a rationale for the mathematics and science programs and shared hands-on activities showing connections to the standards and higher-level thinking. Parents/families had an opportunity to ask questions and participate in activities with their children. Curriculum packets designed to share the goals of each mathematics module, major classroom activities used to support those goals, and strategies for parents to utilize with their children at home were developed for each mathematics module for grades K-8. These packets were available for checkout through school libraries. 5.2 Primary Partners The LR CPMSA is fortunate to have ongoing partnerships with three major institutions that are committed to improving mathematics and science education for all students in the Little Rock School District. The University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR), Philander Smith College (PSC), and the Arkansas Museum of Discovery (AMOD) have provided opportunities for students and teachers in mathematics and science. 5.2.1 University of Arkansas at Little Rock The University of Arkansas at Little Rock, through the College of Education, College of Information Science and Systems Engineering, and the College of Mathematics and Science, provided professional development opportunities for teachers and participated on the Little Rock CPMSA Governing Board. In 2001-2002, for example, two mathematics content-based courses on the topics of geometry and rational numbers were developed for K-5 teachers. Activities, aligned with the Investigations curriculum, emphasized the mathematics content aimed at deepening the content knowledge of teachers in mathematics. A new course was developed and offered to high school geometry teachers. Strategies for Teaching Geometry was developed based on the Arkansas geometry goals and results of the end-of- course geometry Benchmark. Over 27 teachers participated in the three-hour graduate level course. Each course was team-taught by a UALR instructor and an instructor(s) from the Little Rock School District. 5.2.2 Philander Smith College In 2001-2002, for example. Philander Smith College provided the site of the Project THRIVE session for students taking Algebra I. Undergraduate students serving as mentors contributed to the Little Rock CPMSA in an advisory capacity during SY 2001-2002 by serving on the governing board. Plans were developed to offer a Saturday academy. Project THRIVE, as a follow-up activity for students who participated in SMART 2001 {See Student Support). 5.2.3 Arkansas Museum of Discovery23 The Arkansas Museum of Discovery (AMOD) provided opportunities that engaged diverse audiences in an interdisciplinary and humanistic discovery of the sciences, social sciences, and technology. AMOD served the LR CPMSA in an advisory capacity and provided support for students in science. The activities of the After School Discovery Clubs (see Student Support) were aligned with the Little Rock School District content standards and benchmarks for science. 6 Measures of Effectiveness Focused on Student Outcomes Outcomes are presented in this section to provide evidence that the CPMSA is enhancing student achievement. Key indicators for successfill CPMSA implementation include enrollment in upper level mathematics and science courses, results of student performance on state-mandated norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests, and participation and scores on college entrance examinations. 6.1 National Trends in Mathematics and Science Achievement The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is a project of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in the U.S. Department of Education and is overseen by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB). Since 1969, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has been the sole ongoing national indicator of what American students know and can do in major academic subjects. Detailed reports on NAEP assessments, such as The Nations Report Card: Mathematics 2000 and The Nation's Report Card: Science 2000, are available on the Web at: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard. Over the years, NAEP has measured students achievement in many subjects, including reading, mathematics, science, writing, history, civics, geography, and the arts. In 2000 and 2002, NAEP conducted assessments in reading at grade 4 and in 2000 in mathematics and science at grades 4, 8, and 12. In addition, NAEP conducted state-by-state assessments in mathematics and science at grades 4 and 8. Results^for the 2000 NAEP mathematics assessment show overall gains in fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth graders average scores since 1990, the first year in which the current mathematics assessment was administered. Twelfth-graders performance, however, has declined since 1996. National scores in 2000 were higher than in 1996, 1992, or 1990 for fourth- and eighth-graders. This was not the case for twelfth-graders.. The average score for high school seniors was lower in 2000 than in 1996. However, twelfth-graders average score was higher in 2000 than in 1990. Results for the 2000 NAEP science assessment show no significant change in grades 4 and 8, and a ec me in performance at grade 12 since 1996. This science assessment was first administered to nationally representative samples of fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-grade students in 1996. In 2000, the average scores of fourth- and eighth-graders were essentially unchanged from 1996. The only significant change in average score results occurred at grade 12, where there was a statistically significant decline in students average score. It should be noted that every test has a standard error of measurement. Achievement levels provide a context for interpreting students performance on NAEP. These performance standards, set by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB), are based on recommendations from broadly representative panels and educators and members of the public and determine what students should know and be able to do for the Basic, Proficient, and Advanced levels of performance in each subject area and grade level assessed. As provided by law, the Acting Commissioner of Education Statistics, upon review of a congressionally- mandated evaluation of NAEP, has determined that the achievement levels are to be considered developmental and should be interpreted and used with caution. t I I J24 However, both the Acting Commissioner and NAGB believe that these performance standards are useful for understanding trends in student achievement. NAEP achievement levels have been widely used by national and state officials, including the National Education Goals Panel. The achievement level policy definitions are as follows:  Basic. This level denotes partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade.  Proficient'. This level represents solid academic performance for each grade assessed. Students reaching this level have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter, including subject-matter knowledge, application of such knowledge to real-world situations, and analytical skills appropriate to the subject matter.  Advanced'. This level signifies superior performance. In mathematics, according to the NAEP, the percentages of fourth-graders and eighth-graders at or above Basic and at or above Proficient have increased across the decade, reaching their highest levels in 2000. At grade 12, the results are mixed. From 1996 to 2000 there was decrease in the percentage at or above the Basic achievement level. However, the percentage of twelfth-graders at or above both the Basic and Proficient achievement levels was higher in 2000 than in 1990. In science, according to the NAEP, the 2000 science assessment results show few changes since 1996 in the percentages of students at or above any of the NAEP achievement levels. At grade 4, there was no change between 1996 and 2000 in the percentage of students attaining any of the achievement levels. At grade 8, however, between 1996 and 2000 there was an increase in the percentage of students reaching the Proficient achievement level or above. At grade 12, the percentage of students at or above the Basic achievement level declined between 1996 and 2000. In order to display assessment information about schools in the Little Rock School District, we use stacked bars in the graphs. The length of each bar is proportional to the number of student scores which fell within that range. Basic range. Proficient range, and Advanced range may be described as follows:  All scores which lie below the Basic achievement level are characterized by the color aqua.  All scores which lie above the Basic achievement level and below the Proficient achievement level fall in the Basic range and are characterized by the color lime.  All scores which lie above the Proficient achievement level and below the Advanced achievement level fall in the Proficient range and are characterized by the color plum or dark red.  All scores which lie above the Advanced achievement level fall in the Advanced range are characterized by the color blue or ocean blue. If a set of data is arranged in order of magnitude, the values, which divide the data into four equal parts, are called quartiles and denoted by gi, Q2, and 04. Thus the percentage of scores within each quartlie is 25 percent. The percentages shown in the graph are relative to those quartiles obtained from ^e national distribution of data (scores). In this report, the achievement level description was used instead. The actual percentage of LRSD student scores within a national quartile, 0i, data range was reported as percentage within Below Basic range, the actual percentage within a national quartile, Qz, as within Basic range, and the actual percentage within a national quartile as number of scores within Proficient range. The top quartile, Qu, was reported as Advanced range. The following chart illustrates performance on assessments relative to achievement levels.25 (100) Advanced Range (75-99) Advanced Achievement Level (75) Proficient Range (50-74) Proficient Achievement Level (50) Basic Range 25-49) Basic Achievement Level (25) Below Basic Range (0-24) Performance at or above Basic achievement level (25-99) Performance at or above Proficient achievement level (50-99) Performance at or above Advanced achievement level (75-99 The bars in the following figures represent the proportion of students in each of three achievement level ranges: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced as well as students below Basic. The horizontal line that intersects the vertical axis at 0% divides the proportion of student scores which were above the Proficient or Advanced achievement level from those student scores which fell in the Below Basic range or in the Basic range. 6.2 Determining Improvement from Changes in Percentages of Students Who Performed At or Above Different Achievement Levels The cooperative agreement with NSF (Amendment No. 3) states that assessment data from the CPMSA pro^am for Years 3,4, and 5 will be used to determine an annual increase in achievement levels. To minimize the inherent volatility associated with the natural variation in annual performance, the trend was determined by computing the change in percentage points per year for each achievement level: Basic, Proficient, and Advanced. For this purpose, the slope of a regression line was computed from the data for SY 2000-2001, SY 2001-2002, and SY 2002-2003. The first NSF driver focuses on sustainable success in changing the systems approach to the teaching and learning of mathematics and science in K-12. Implementation of a comprehensive, standards-based curriculum and/or instructional materials that are aliped with instruction and assessment really began in the first year (SY 1998-99) of the NSF award. With the convergence of resources that reasonably could be used to support science and mathematics education, this systemic program was more fully implemented in SY 2000-2001. By this date, the general education graduation requirements for the Little Rock School District were three (3) units of mathematics: Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II or Statistics\nand three (3) units of science: Physics, Biology, and Chemistry. Also, the transition to middle schools had taken place by SY 2000-2001. Therefore, assessment data from previous years will be shown, but improvement will be determined from the last three years of data: 2000-2001,2001-2002, and 2002-2003. State-Mandated Assessments The results of state-mandated assessments are shown below. These criterion-referenced tests are administered to establish the level of student achievement relative to the Arkansas academic standards and to compare the level of student achievement with performance levels set by the State Board of Education.26 6.3 Mathematics Assessment in Grade 6 with the Arkansas Benchmark In Figure 8, the intermediate Benchmark assessment for mathematics assessment in grade 6 is shown as quartiles for SY 2000-2001, SY 2001-2002, and SY 2002-2003. SY 2001-2001 was a pilot year for that benchmark assessment. Thus no Benchmark data for grade 6 exists prior to SY 2000-2001. For the Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in grade 6 mathematics, the percentage of students below the basic achievement level decreased from 66 percent to 55 percent from SY 2000-2001 to SY 2002-2003. Figure 9 shows the achievement levels corresponding to these quartiles for each of the three years. Figure 8: Mathematics Quartiles for the Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in Grade 6 20% 4 4 9 12 16 0% 2(jBV2002e^! 6 2cB-2003eaai6 ! 1 -24 -25 -25 -20% -40% J Below Basic Level  Basic Range  Advanced Range  Proficient Range -60% -66 -59 -55 -80% -100%27 Figure 9: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for Grade 6  Number ef LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Levei in Grade 6 Math  Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Levei in Grade 6 Math  Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Levei in Grade 6 Math 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 45 41 30 34 20 10 10 1 2000-2001 Grade 6 2001-2002 Grade 6 2002-2003 Grade 6 0  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 5.3 points per year.  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 4.7 points per year.  The percentage of students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 1.2 points per year. 28 Figure 10\nAchievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for Caucasian Students in Grade 6  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math 100 90 I 80 79 82 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 71 31 2000-2001 Grade 6 2001-2002 Grade 6 2002-2003 Grade 6 0 5 1 T  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 5.6 points per year.  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at was changed as follows or above the Proficient achievement level  In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 11.8 points per year.  The percentage of students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 4.0 points per year. 29 Figure 11: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for African American Students in Grade 6  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Grade 6 Math 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 32 28 20 21 10 0 L 2  1 2000-2001 Grade 6 2001-2002 Grade 6 2002-2003 Grade 6  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 5.3 points per year.  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 2.8 points per year.  The percentage of students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 6, this percentage increased approximately 0.5 points per year. In order to better understand these annual rates of change in achievement level, two additional numbers were computed. On the Basic Level line in the table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below the Basic achievement level was determined by dividing the total percent of students below the Basic achievement level by 10. On the Proficient Level line in the table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below the Proficient achievement level was determined by dividing the total percent of students below the Proficient achievement level by 10. These rates answer the question: What rate of change would be necessary to reduce the number of students below Basic achievement level or Proficient achievement level by ten percent? For a reference, the changes in achievement levels in the table may be compared with these two numbers, which are shown in the following tables. The quartile data for computing these two numbers came from the most recent assessments in SY 2002-2003.30 Table 5: Grade 6 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Mathematics 77 Grade 6 Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates All Students in District Caucasian Students African American Students Basic Level Proficient Level Advanced Level Change 5.3 4.7 1.2 Rate 5.5 8.0 Change 5.6 11.8 4.0 Rate 1.8 4.6 Change 5.3 2.8 0.5 Rate 6.8 9.2 6.4 Mathematics Assessment in Grade 4 and Grade 8 with the Arkansas Benchmark In the following figure, the primary benchmark assessment for mathematics in grade 4 and the middle level benchmark assessment for mathematics in grade 8 mathematics are shown as quartiles from 1998 to 2003. The next figure shows the achievement levels corresponding to the quartile data. Figure 12: Mathematics Quartiles for the Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in Grade 4 and Grade 8 60% 40% 31 19 20% 16 17 0% -20% -40% -60% 13 -19 -59 21 14 a 13 19 19 J4 -55 2CI1IM 2CG4 2(004 fl 1(11158 4 13 21 158 *19 20 H9 -24 :-32 2tjBli 58 I -28 fi 2CW58 I 2Cni58 -51 -42 -31 LJ -65 -55 -58 -35 -41  Advanced Range  Proficient Range Below Basic Level  Basic Range for Math -51 -44 9 U  -80% -100% For the Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in grade 4 mathematics, the percentage of students below the basic achievement level decreased from 59 percent to 31 percent from SY 1998-1999 to SY 2002-2003. In grade 8 mathematics, the percentage of students below the basic achievement level decreased from 65 percent to 44 percent from SY 1998-1999 to SY 2002-2003. 18 On the Basic Level line in the table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below the Basic achievement level was determined by dividing the total percent of students below the Basic achievement level by 10. On the Proficient Level line in the table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below the Proficient achievement level was determined by dividing the total percent of students below the Proficient achievement level by 10. These rates answer the question: What rate of change would be necessary to reduce the number of students below Basic achievement level or Proficient achievement level by ten percent? For a point of reference, the changes in achievement levels in the table may be compared with these two numbers. A31 Figure 13: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for Grade 4 and Grade 8  Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Levei in Mathematics  Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Levei in Mathematics  Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Mathematics 100 90 80 70 69 60 58 56 50 40 30 20 10 45 41 49 UI 50 31 42 45 35 11 10 1 49 14 16 0 2 I I 3 I 3 I 1998-1999 Grade 4 1999-2000 Grade 4 2000-2001 Grade 4 2001-2002 Grade 4 2002-2003 Grade 4 1998-1999 Grade 8 1999-2000 Grade 8 2000-2001 Grade 8 2001-2002 Grade 8 2002-2003 Grade 8  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 10.0 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 5.9 points per year.  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 10.2 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -0.5 points per year.  The percentage of students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 7.1 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -0.2 points per year.32 Figure 14: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for Caucasian Students in Grade 4 and Grade 8  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level in Mathematics  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level in Mathematics  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Mathematics 100 90 SO 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 81 91 93 82 89 76 53 25 JM- 1998-1999 Grade 4 76 60 40 1999-2000 Grade 4 62 40 2000-2001 Grade 4 75 48 2001-2002 Grade 4 74 78 80 82 63 2002-2003 Grade 4 lllll 1998-1999 Grade 8 1999-2000 Grade 8 2000-2001 Grade 8 2001-2002 Grade 8 2002-2003 Grade 8 0  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 6.2 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 4.2 points per year.  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 10.1 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 3.1 points per year.  The percentage of students who performed at changed follows or above the Advanced achievement level was as  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 11.6 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 0.5 points per year.33 Figure 15: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Mathematics Quartiles for African American Students in Grade 4 and Grade 8  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Levei in Mathematics  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Levei in Mathematics  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Levei in Mathematics 100 90 80 70 60 58 50 40 30 35 31 45 36 45 20 10 26 I III 28 28 19 2, 3, 0  8 2 I  5 4 4 1998-1999 Grade 4 1999-2000 Grade 4 2000-2001 Grade 4 2001-2002 Grade 4 2002-2003 Grade 4 1998-1999 Grade 8 1999-2000 Grade 8 2000-2001 Grade 8 2001-2002 Grade 8 2002-2003 Grade 8  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 11.4 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 8.6 points per year.  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 9.6 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -0.3 points per year.  The percentage of students who performed at changed as follows or above the Advanced achievement level was  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 4.5 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -0.1 points per year. L34 6.5 Literacy Assessments in Grade 4 and Grade 8 with the Arkansas Benchmark Figure 16: Literacy Quartiles for the Arkansas Benchmark Assessments: in Grade 4 and Grade 8 80% 60% 8 5 40% 56 B 7 20% 45 31 35 15 24 -20% -40%. -60% 9G\u0026gt;e9G4 9G4 OC|I34 01G4 oA il34 9GB8 -26 -31 -33 -31 -27 -10 -41 -28 -32 -19 -39 )CW1I -36 O( H 138 -33 01 HI -29 -46 0241138 -38 -23  Advanced Range  Proficient Range Below Basic Level  Basic Range for Literacy 0% , __i l 38 -80% -100%, On the grade 4 literacy assessment, the percentage of students who performed at or below basic declined om 41 percent to 10 percent. The first assessment was in SY 1998-1999. On the grade 8 literacy assessment, the percentage of students who performed at percent. The first assessment was in SY 1999-2000. or below basic declined from 46 percent to 2335 Figure 17\nAchievement Levels Corresponding to the Literacy Quartiles for All Students Who Took the Arkansas Benchmark Assessments in Grade 4 and Grade 8  Number of Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Levei in Literacy  Number of Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Levei in Literacy  Number of Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Levei in Literacy 100 90 90 80 70 60 59 81 77 50 40 30 20 10 72 68 63 54 67 71 1111 h 111 0 98-99 G4 99-00 G4 00-01 G4 01-02 G4 02-03 G4 99-00 G8 00-01 G8 01-02 G8 02-03 G8 The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or changed as follows above the Basic achievement level was  Relative to SY 2000-2001, this percentage for grade 4 increased approximately 10.9 points per year.  For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 5.1 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or was as follows above the Proficient achievement level  For grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 14.2 points per year.  For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 3.8 points per year. The percentage of students who performed at follows or above the Advanced achievement level was as * For grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 2.9 points per year. * For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -1.5 points per year.36 Figure 18: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Literacy Quartiles for Caucasian Students in Grade 4 and Grade 8  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level in Literacy  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level in Literacy  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Literacy 100 99 90 96 90 90 90 89 91 92 80 70 83 78 79 60 62 66 63 61 69 50 40 30 20 10 IS 20 20 10 0 4 6 6 98-99 G4 99-00 G4 00-01 G4 01-02 G4 02-03 G4 99-00 G8 00-01 G8 01-02 G8 02-03 G8 The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was as follows  For grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 4.6 points per year.  For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 1.7 points per year. The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was as follows  For grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 13.2 points per year.  For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 3.8 points per year.  The percentage of students who performed at follows or above the Advanced achievement level was as  For grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 7.0 points per year.  For grade 8, this percentage increased approximately -5.0 points per year.37 T Figure 19: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Literacy Quartiles for African American Students in Grade 4 and Grade 8  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level in Literacy  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level in Literacy  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level in Literacy 100 90 80 86 70 60 64 59 75 64 57 72 50 48 40 30 20 20 23 10 44 18 21 28 0 0 0 9 0 1 1 1 98-99 G4 99-00 G4 00-01 G4 01-02 G4 02-03 G4 99-00 G8 00-01 G8 01-02 G8 02-03 G8  The percentage of African American students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 13.9 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 7.4 points per year.  The percentage of African American students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows  In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 15.2 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 5.0 points per year.  The percentage of African American students who performed at or achievement level was changed as follows above the Advanced * In grade 4, this percentage increased approximately 1.4 points per year.  In grade 8, this percentage increased approximately 0.1 points per year.38 Table 6: Grade 4 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Mathematics 7^ Grade 4 Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates All Students in District Caucasian Students African American Students Basic Level Proficient Level Advanced Level Change 10.0 10.2 7.1 Rate 3.1 5.0 Change 6.2 10.1 11.6 Rate 0.7 1.8 Change 11.4 9.6 4.5 Rate 4.2 6.5 Table 7: Grade 4 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Literacy ______Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates Grade 4 Basic Level Proficient Level Advanced Level All Students in District Caucasian Students African American Students Change 10.9 14.2 2.9 Rate 1.0 3.7 Change 4.6 13.2 7.0 Rate 0.1 1.0 Change 13.9 15.2 1.4 Rate 1.4 4.7 Table 8: Grade 8 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Mathematics Grade 8 Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates Ail Students in District Caucasian Students African American Students Basic Level Proficient Level Advanced Level Change 5.9 -0.5 -0.2 Rate 4.4 8.4 Change 4.2 3.1 0.5 Rate 1.1 4.9 Change 8.6 -0.3 -0.1 Rate 5.5 9.6 Table 9: Grade 8 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Literacy Grade 8 Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates All Students in District Caucasian Students African American Students Basic Level firoficient Level Advanced Level Change 5.1 3.8 -1.5 Rate 2.3 6.1 Change 1.7 3.8 -5.0 Rate 0.8 3.1 Change 7.4 5.0 0.1 Rate 2.8 7.2 6 End-of-Course Assessments for Algebra I and Geometry following figure, the end-of-course assessments for Algebra I and Geometry are shown quartiles from 2000 to 2003. The next figure shows the achievement levels corresponding to the quarttie Uta. Here SY 2000-2001 was the baseline year for computing increases in achievement level. level 1 I Basic Level line in the table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below tlw ac I determined by dividing the total percent of students below the Basic achievement level by 10. n e det*  table, an annual rate of reduction in the number of students below the Proficient acWevemen auccf^^^ dividing the total percent of students below the Proficient achievement level by 10. These ra es p- fl**?\"' ''^bat rate of change would be necessary to reduce the number of students below Basic ac eyemen level by ten percent? For a point of reference, the changes in achievement levels m the Y \u0026lt;=nipared with these two numbers.39 Figure 20: Algebra I and Geometry Quartiles at End-of-Course 80% 60% 40% 5 6 20% 34 11 17 24 11 13 0% 2901-SB 2 24.203 -20% -32 i -39 -32 2Ve2 - -31 , -44  Advanced Range  Proficient Range Beiow Basic Level  Basic Range -40% I____j -60% -55 -40 -29 -55 -52 -17 -41 : I I I J I -80% -100% For the Algebra I Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in grades 7-10 (middle and high school), the percentage of students below the basic achievement level decreased from 55 percent to 29 percent from SY 2000-2001 to SY 2002-2003. For the Geometry Arkansas Benchmark Assessment in grades 9-11 (high school only), the percentage of students below the basic achievement level decreased from 55 percent to 17 percent from SY 2000-2001 to SY 2002-2003.40 Figure 21: Achievement Levels Corresponding to the Quartiles for Algebra I and Geometry  Number of LRSD Students In Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level  Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level  Number of LRSD Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level 100 90 80 83 70 71 60 60 50 40 30 20 10 45 13 11 45 13 48 2000-2001 Algebra 2001-2002 Algebra 2002-2003 Algebra 2000-2001 Geometry 2001-2002 Geometry 2002-2003 Geometry 0 3  2  1  From 2000-2001, the percentage of LRSD students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 12.9 points per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 19.2 points per year.  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or was changed as follows above the Proficient achievement level  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 8.4 points per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 13.1 points per year.  The percentage of LRSD students who performed at or was as follows above the Advanced achievement level  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 1.6 points per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 1.7 points per year.41 Figure 22\nAchievement Levels for LRSD Caucasian Students Who Took the Algebra I and Geometry Tests  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level 100 90 80 84 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 76 34 2001-2002 Algebra 92 60 15 82 80 43 I 10 I 96 2000-2001 Algebra 2002-2003 Algebra 2000-2001 Geometry 2001-2002 Geometry 2002-2003 Geometry 0 7 I From 2000-2001, the percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 8.0 per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 6.9 points per year. The percentage of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 12.8 points per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 14.8 points per year. The percentage of Caucasian students who performed at level was changed as follows or above the Advanced achievement  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 4.0 points per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 2.9 points per year. 41 Figure 22: Achievement Levels for LRSD Caucasian Students Who Took the Algebra I and Geometry Tests  Number of Caucasian Students In Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level  Number of Caucasian Students In Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level  Number of Caucasian Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level 100 96 90 80 84 92 82 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 76 34 2000-2001 Algebra 2001-2002 Algebra 43 I 10 2002-2003 Algebra 2000-2001 Geometry 2001-2002 Geometry 2002-2003 Geometry 7 0 I  From 2000-2001, the percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra 1, this percentage increased approximately 8.0 per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 6.9 points per year.  The percentage of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 12.8 points per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 14.8 points per year.  The percentage of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra 1, this percentage increased approximately 4.0 points per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 2.9 points per year.42 Figure 23: Achievement Levels for LRSD African American Students Who Took the Algebra I and Geometry Tests  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Basic Achievement Level  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Proficient Achievement Level  Number of African American Students in Percent Who Performed at or above the Advanced Achievement Level 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 28 51 72 61 34 28 20 16 17 11 10 2, 2000-2001 Algebra 2001-2002 Algebra 2002-2003 Algebra 2000-2001 Geometry 2001-2002 Geometry 2002-2003 Geometry 0 : 1 1 3 6 1 1  From 2000-2001, the percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was changed as follows  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra I, this percentage increased approximately 16.8 points per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 22.0 points per year.  The percentage of students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was changed as follows  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra 1, this percentage increased approximately 6.7 points per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 7.1 percentage points per year.  The percentage of students who performed at or above the Advanced achievement level was changed as follows  For middle and high school students combined in Algebra 1, this percentage increased approximately 0.3 points per year.  For high school students in Geometry, this percentage increased approximately 0.3 points per year.43 Table 10: Grades 7-10 Improvement in Achievement Levels on Benchmark Assessment in Algebra Grades 7-10 Change in Achievement Levels in Percentage Points per Year Compared to Other Rates' All Students in D\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eCleaver, Vanessa E.\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eWold, Donald C.\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eGlasgow, Dennis\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n\u003cdcterms_creator\u003eLittle Rock School District\u003c/dcterms_creator\u003e\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "},{"id":"bcas_bcmss0837_1059","title":"\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda","collection_id":"bcas_bcmss0837","collection_title":"Office of Desegregation Management","dcterms_contributor":null,"dcterms_spatial":["United States, 39.76, -98.5","United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959"],"dcterms_creator":null,"dc_date":["2003-12"],"dcterms_description":null,"dc_format":["application/pdf"],"dcterms_identifier":null,"dcterms_language":["eng"],"dcterms_publisher":["Little Rock, Ark. : Butler Center for Arkansas Studies. Central Arkansas Library System."],"dc_relation":null,"dc_right":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/"],"dcterms_is_part_of":["Office of Desegregation Monitoring records (BC.MSS.08.37)","History of Segregation and Integration of Arkansas's Educational System"],"dcterms_subject":["Little Rock (Ark.)--History--21st Century","Little Rock School District","Education--Arkansas","Education--Economic aspects","Education--Evaluation","Education--Finance","Educational law and legislation","Educational planning","Educational statistics","School board members","School boards","School improvement programs","School superintendents"],"dcterms_title":["\"Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting\" agenda"],"dcterms_type":["Text"],"dcterms_provenance":["Butler Center for Arkansas Studies"],"edm_is_shown_by":null,"edm_is_shown_at":["http://arstudies.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/bcmss0837/id/1059"],"dcterms_temporal":null,"dcterms_rights_holder":null,"dcterms_bibliographic_citation":null,"dlg_local_right":null,"dcterms_medium":["documents (object genre)"],"dcterms_extent":null,"dlg_subject_personal":null,"dcterms_subject_fast":null,"fulltext":"\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n   \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\nThis transcript was created using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and may contain some errors.\nAgenda RECEIVED DEC l ~- 2003 OFFICE OF DESEGREGATION MONITORING Little Rock School District Board of Directors' Meeting HAVE A SAFE \u0026amp; HAPPY WINTER HOLIDA YI DECEMBER 2003 ,.. n-., \u0026gt;::o ,i.-..~_ cil o\u0026gt; :,,::o C-\u0026lt; m-., ::0 C: -:ozn ,o...- i\u0026lt;5 r-z ~ en I. 11. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS A. Call to Order B. Roll Call PROCEDURAL MATTERS A. Welcome to Guests REGULAR MEETING December 18, 2003 5:30 p.m. Ill. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS/PUBLIC COMMENTS: A. Superintendent's Citations B. Partners in Education - New Partnerships Booker Arts Magnet School - Cheryl Carson \u0026amp; Vivian Johnson Wonder State Odd Fellow Lodge #1 - Eddie \u0026amp; Carolyn Ward Dodd Elementary School - Faith McLaughlin \u0026amp; Teresa Knapp Greater Friendship, Inc. - Pat Williams, Rev. B. E. Bennett \u0026amp; Dr. M. Dee Bennett Gibbs Magnet School - Felicia Hobbs Heifer International - Ann Owen Mann Magnet Middle School - Jim Fullerton Heifer International - Ann Owen Jefferson Elementary School - Roberta Mannon Twin City Bank, Kavanaugh Branch - Pris Skarda Otter Creek Elementary - Janis Tucker \u0026amp; Michelle Young Bank of the Ozarks - Lisa Smith C. Remarks from Citizens (persons who have signed up to speak) D. Little Rock Classroom Teachers Association E. Joshua lntervenors 0 \"D \u0026gt;.r.-.X p_:I! cii o\u0026gt; XI XI mc--\u0026lt;., XI C: -z XI 0 o--\u0026lt; ... i5 r-z gen Board of Directors Meeting December 18, 2003 Page2 IV. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS: A. Remarks from Board Members B. Student Assignment Report C. Budget Update D. Construction Report: Proposed Bond Projects E. Internal Auditors Report F. Technology Update V. APPROVAL OF ROUTINE MATTERS: A. Minutes B. Personnel Changes VI. CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION: A. Revision of Policy IKF: General Education Graduation Requirements Revision of Regulations ID-R: Student Schedules Revision of Regulations IMP-R: Physical Education and Training B. Revision of Regulation IKC-R: Class Rankings \u0026amp; Grade Point Averages C. Program Evaluation for Mathematics and Science VII. BUSINESS SERVICES DIVISION: A. Employee Request to Conduct Business with the District B. Donations of Property C. Financial Report VIII. CLOSING REMARKS: Superintendent's Report: 1. Dates to Remember 2. Special Functions IX. EMPLOYEE HEARINGS X. ADJOURNMENT I. PRELIMINARY FUNCTIONS CA.LL TO ORDER I ROLL CALL II. PROCEDURAL MATTERS WELCOME TO GUESTS 111. REPORTS/RECOGNITIONS A. SUPT. CITATIONS B. PARTNERSHIPS C. REMARKS FROM CITIZENS D. LR.CTA E.JOSHUA To: From: Through: Subject: Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 December 18, 2003 Board of Education Debbie Milam, Director, ViPS/Partners in Education~ Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Partners in Education Program: New partnerships The Little Rock School District Partners in Education program is designed to develop strong relationships between the community and our schools. The partnership process encourages businesses, community agencies and private organizations to join with individual schools to enhance and support educational programs. Each partnership utilizes the resources of both the school and the business for their mutual benefit. The following schools and businesses have completed the requirements necessary to establish a partnership and are actively working together to accomplish their objectives. We recommend that the Board approve the following partnerships: Booker Arts Magnet School and Wonder State Odd Fellow Lodge #1 David 0. Dodd Elementary School and Greater Friendship, Inc. Gibbs Magnet School and Heifer International Horace Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet School and Heifer International Jefferson Elementary School and Twin City Bank-Kavanaugh Branch Otter Creek Elementary School and Bank of the Ozarks !.z.\". m ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ Booker Arts Magnet 2016 Barber Street Little Rock, AR 72206 Principal: Dr. Cheryl Carson Counselors: Vivian Johnson \u0026amp; Tammy Ringler Booker Arts Magnet School offers students an environment of spontaneity, freedom of expression, individuality and creativity. The goals of Booker Arts Magnet School are: - To nurture the students' learning To encourage personal expression To use the arts to motivate student achievement To foster self-discipline inherent in artistic achievement To instill within students an understanding of the relationship of the arts in their daily lives. We the Booker Arts Magnet Team would like to develop a partnership with the Wonder State Odd Fellow Lodge # 1. The purpose of this partnership is to enhance the educational programs of our school. Booker Arts Magnet Team plans to contribute the following in return for your partnership: a) Enhanced public image and the opportunity to be recognized for making a significant contribution to the community. b) Gain insight into our public school system and the contemporary education process. Wonder State Odd Fellow Lodge # 1 The Independent Order of Odd Fellows And Rebekahs Odd Fellowship is a Fraternal Organization, based on the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man. It does charitable work on various projects in the community. Through its teachings and ceremonies, it seeks to elevate the character of man, and thereby make this world a better place in which to live. The Odd Fellowship Fraternal Organization would like to enhance the educational experiences of the students and staff of Booker Arts Magnet. We would like to enter into a partnership with Booker Arts Magnet. Listed below are some of the partnership activities we plan to assist in: a) Provide school supplies for needy students. b) Support the students and staff in school events. c) Members will volunteer their time for school events. d) Meet regularly with the School Team to assess progress. e) Promote ongoing recognition and appreciation of the staff at Booker Arts Magnet. !\"!=' lesn .! ii :en ~ David 0. Dodd Elementary School and Greater Friendship, Inc. Partnership Proposal Greater Friendship, Inc. will contribute the following to the partnership:  Encourage employees to volunteer as readers on VIPS Reading Day  Provide resources for the after-school tutoring program  Provide resources for parent workshops  Provide resources for student workshops  Oversee and direct the 21 st CCLC-Dodd David 0. Dodd Elementary will contribute the following to the partnership:  Acknowledge GFI, Inc. as a Partner in Education  Provide resources for grant proposals as needed  Implement and Organize the 21 st CCLC-Dodd Gibbs Magnet Elementary School and Heifer International Partnership Proposal Heifer International will contribute the following to the partnership:  Participate in ViPS Reading Day at Gibbs by providing readers and donating books to the library  Look for opportunities to bring together students from Heifer's three partner schools--Gibbs, Mann and Central-in projects to benefit and/or promote Heifer and its work  Look for ways to connect Gibbs students with children in orphanages that Heifer works with around the world Gibbs will contribute the following to the partnership:  Serve as the kick-off school for the Read to Feed challenge  Provide a delegation for Heifer celebrations, such as the groundbreaking, 60th anniversary, grand opening, public service announcements, etc.  Provide student artwork  Encourage Gibbs students to buy an animal for a family as a community service project  Look for ways to invite Heifer's international staff and visitors to the school !.z.'\". m !l! 'f! \u0026gt; C: C a\no Partnership Outline Heifer International and Horace Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet Horace Mann students have experienced many educational opportunities while working with Heifer International. Our school has raised funds as service projects to benefit others through Heifer International. Many students have visited the Ranch at Perryville while on field trips and the children always return excited about what they have learned. We would like to continue to work in these areas with our students and provide an outline of additional suggestions and recommendations that will strengthen our relationship and partnership with Heifer Internationa I. Suggested opportunities for Horace Mann Arts \u0026amp; Science Magnet and Heifer International:  Science related activities that would expose our students to the implications of lacking sciences in developing countries  Opportunities to gain practical experience of how others live as well as specific cultural experiences  Support and assistance with our annual Multicultural Celebration  Heifer International fundraising advisement opportunities for our school  Assistance in developing a writing/pen pal program with a foreign country  Development of a long-term project with the selected country/region. The school will display items specific to the country/region and provide instructional activities that will include all academic disciplines  The school will dedicate a display case in our new building to showcase our partnership with Heifer International Partnership Proposal Twin City Bank - Kavanaugh Branch and Jefferson Elementary School Twin City Bank - Kavanaugh Branch commits to the following partnership activities:  Sponsor Red Ribbon Week  Count change collected through fundraisers  Arrange for Penny, Nick and Buck to make appearances at school functions  Recruit employees to read to students and listen to students read  Job Shadowing  Provide speakers for topics such as economics, saving money, etc.  Sponsor Special Olympics Team T-shirts  Provide refreshments for staff functions Jefferson Elementary School commits to the following activities:  Provide artwork for display in bank lobby  Provide choir to perform on holidays and special occasions  Acknowledge Twin City Bank - Kavanaugh Branch as a Partner in Education  Invite the Bank to school events  Work together with the bank for community service projects !II (.\"..)..,., ID C:: c::c 8~ !!l\n: c::\u0026lt;n ~~ \u0026gt;z ril ~ .z.. . !'I .z... m I c\u0026gt;:: C i ~ BANKof the OZARKS 13415 Otter Creek Parkway Little Rock, AR 72210 (501) 978-3545 (501) 978-3546 (fax) Partners in Education Proposal with Otter Creek Elementary School Bank of the Ozarks commits to the following partnership activities:  Breakfast for teachers for the first day of school.  Reading for ViPS  Assistance with Book Fair (Deborah Pike works with Lisa Booth to prepare for the book fair in the fall and spring)  Christmas donation for teacher recognition  Morning Muffins - help serve periodically  Volunteers to assist in the year-end field day activities  Roll the pennies from the \"Pennies for Pasta\" drive  Ask peer helpers to make Christmas cards for a local retirement center as a joint community service project Otter Creek Elementary School commits to the following partnership activities:  Provide artwork for bank  Acknowledge bank as partner in education  Assist bank with community service projects  Provide opportunities for bank employees to become involved in public education '.\n4n Individual Approach to a World of Knowledge\" DATE: TO: FROM: PREPARED BY: SUBJECT: December 18, 2003 Board of Directors Donald M. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Bill Goodman~~ December 2003 Construction Report - Bond Projects On December 20th, the move from the portable classrooms to the new classrooms will begin at Mann Magnet Middle School. Generally, those students and teachers that were displaced to the portable classrooms will move into the new forty-four [ 44] classroom building. The move will take place during the holidays and will be completed by the start of school on January 5, 2004. This will be an exciting time for all of the Mann students and staff. I hope you have an opportunity to visit the new building soon. I know you will be proud and impressed. The last construction phase at Mabelvale Middle School is complete except for two [2] classrooms. The move to the new office area and media center is in progress. Please note in my report that the planning process has started for schools that have had little or no work done up until now. The list is not complete but should be in January. The drawings and cost estimates for remodeling Mitchell and Rightsell will be complete this month. I hope you have a wonderful holiday season. Please call me at 447-1146 if you have any questions. 810 W Markham  Little Rock, Arkansas 72201  www.lrsd.k12.ar.us 501-324-2000  fax: 501-324-2032 !ll ~ is zz rm- !\" .z.. m ~ ~ \u0026gt; C: 0 i :..,., nm ::c C: ~ m Facility Name Baseline CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD DECEMBER 18, 2003 BOND PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION Project Description Cost Renovation $953,520 -- ~ady --- Addition/renovation - .. $973,621 Central Renovation - Interior $10,200,266 Dunbar Renovation/additi~ $6,161,950 J. A. Fair 6 classroom addition \u0026amp; cafeteria/mus~ room addition $3,155,640 Est. Completion Date Jul-04 Jun-04 Dec-05 Aug~ ---- Feb-04 Renovation --- M-ab-elv-al-e M-S -- - $6,851,6~ Dec-03 -- Mann - - _J'artial Replacement $11,500_,_0QQ___ Dec-03 - - -McC-lellan -~Cl assroom Addition $2,155,622 Jul-04 -- - - --$2,121,226 Parkview Addition Jun-04 -- - -- Pulaski Hgts. Elem Renovation $1,193,259 Aug-04 Pulaski Hgts. MS Renovation - -----,- $3,755,041 Aug-04 Southwest Addition $2,000,000 . Aug-04 Tech Ctr/ Metro Renovation Addition/Renovation - Phase II $2,725,000 Jun-04 -Wa-kefie~ --- --R- ebuild -~I- $5,300,000 I Jul-04 Williams 'Renovation I $2,106,492 Jun-04 Wi-lliams -- Parking expansions $183,717 Jun-04 --- Wilson Renovation/expansion $1 ,263,876 Dec-03 BOND PROJECTS CONSTRUCTION - WINTER/ SPRING 2003-04 t:st. 1_\nompIeuon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Mitchell Renovation $750,000 Aug-04 -- Rightsell Renovation $660,000 Aug-04 BOND PROJECTS PLANNING STARTED CONST. DATE TO BE DETERMINED t:si. 1..,ompIeuon Facility Name Project Description Cost Date B-ooke-r -- Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown Carver Media Center Expansion ' Unknown Unknown Chicot Electrical Upgrade Unknown Unknown Cloverdale Elementary Addition I Unknown Unknown Fair Park Addition Unknown Unknown Forest Heights Remodel Unknown Unknown Garland IRemodel I Unknown Unknown Geyer Springs Roof Repair I Unknown Unknown Gibbs Addition Unknown Unknown Meadowcliff ,Addition Unknown Unknown Pulaski Hgts. MS 1 Energy monitoring system installation I Unknown Western Hills Electrical Upgrade \u0026amp; HVAC Unknown ' Unknown Woodruff Parking addition $193,777 Unknown BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED t:st. 1_\nompIet10n Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Administration Asbestos abatement $380,495 Mar-03 Administration Fresh air system $55,000 Aug-03 Administration Fire alarm $32,350 Aug-03 Administration Annex Energy monitoring system installation May-02 Alternative Learning Ctr. Energy monitoring system installation $15,160 Oct-01 Alternative Learning Ctr. Energy efficient lighting $82,000 Dec-01 Badgett Partial asbestos abatement $237,237 Jul-01 Badgett Fire alarm $18,250 Aug-02 Bale Classroom addition/renovation $2,244,524 Dec-02 Bale Energy monitoring system Mar-02 Bale Partial roof replacement $269,587 Dec-01 Bale HVAC $664,587 Aug-01 CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD DECEMBER 18, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Est. Completion Facility Name Project Description Cost Date Booker Energy efficient lighting ~ $170,295 Apr-01 Boo_ker_______ Energy monitoring system installation 1 $23,710 Oct-01 Booker Asbestos ab_a_te_m_en_t __ _ ______ $_1_0~,9_00 Feb-02 Booker Fire alarm I $34,501 ~ 02 Brady I Energy efficient lighting $80,593 Sep-02 Brady Asbestos abatement -------c--,------,------$-3=--4-,-5-,-,-0-c7-c-2 __ Aug-02 Carver 'Energy monitoring system installation 1 $14,480 1 May-01 1--=-----------i-=--c-~ -,---~ Carver Parking lot I $111 ,742 ' Aug-03 Central Parking - ---Student parking i $174,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley  Stadium light repair \u0026amp; electrical repair 1 ___ $265,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley - ~ hletic Field Improvement $38,000 Aug-03 Central/Quigley Irrigation System --- I $14,500 --=-=-- Aug-03 Central -- -i=\u0026gt;urchaseland for school Unknown I Dec-02 Central --- Roof \u0026amp; exterior renov~ -~ I $2,000,000 Dec-02 Central Ceiling and wall repair $24,000 Oct-01 C_e_n_tra_l -- Fire Alarm System Design/Installation _ _,_ __ $80,876  Aug-01 Central 'Front landing tile repair ' $22,470 Aug-01 C_lo_v_e_rd_ale Ele_m_. ____ E_n_ergy efficient lighting $132,678 Jul-01 _C_lo_v_erdale MS_ _______En e_r=g,y__effi_cie_nt l_i,g,'-h-_tin_g,\"----------- $189,743 1 Jul-01 Cloverdale MS Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $1 ,393,822  Nov-02 Dodd -----,--,,E~n~e-rg_y_e~ff~i,c-ie_n_t-li-gh- t-in_g_ ______ ,_ --$90,665 Aug-01 Dodd Dodd Facilities Service Facility Services Fair Park ~stos abatement-ceiling tile-- 1 $156,299 i Jul-01 Replace roof top HVAC- $215,570 Aug-0~ Interior renovation $84,672 Mar-01 I Fire alarm 1 $12,000 I Aug-03 HVAC renovation/fire alarm $315,956 Apr-02 Fair Park ---~Ene_r=gy~effi_ci_ent_l~ig~h_tin~g~ _________ $90,162 ~ -Q!_ - --+Asb-es-tos- a-ba-tem-en-t-c-eil-ing $59,310 , Aug-01 '-----+----,---'----\"---,------\"---l Fair Park --- J. A. Fair Energy efficient lighting $277,594 Apr-01 ------+-~ '----\"'--'\u0026lt;--------l-------'--,---\"--.,___ ___ _,__-l J. A. Fair Press box $10,784 Nov-00 J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair J. A. Fair Forest Park Forest Park Is ecurity cameras ____ ,_ _____ __$\n__12_,,'5-_00-'_ ___J_ u_n_-0--11 Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 Jul-03 Irrigation System $14,000 Jul-03 Roof repairs $391,871 Aug-03 Replace window units w/central HVAC $485,258 I Nov-03 Diagonal parking $111 ,742 Aug-03 ----~ --'---~ ---------+-------+----~ --. Forest Park I Energy efficient lighting $119,788 May-01 Fulbrig_!,t ---+E_n_ergy efficient lighting I $134,463 Jun-01 Fulbright Energy monitoring system installation $11,950 1 Aug-01 Fulbright _ Replace rooftop HVAC units $107,835 Aug-02 Fulbright ____ ---+P_a_r_ki_n=g_lo_t _________- +---~$14_0_,00_0_ ____S_ ep-_0-2-. Fulbright _ -----+-R_o_o_f_re...,p_a_ir_s __________ ,__ _ ~$-'-2_0_0-'-,0_0_0-+-____ O_c_t-_02-1 Franklin Renovation $2,511,736 Mar-03 --- Gibbs 1Energy efficient lighting $76,447 Apr-01 Gibbs Energy monitoring system installation $11,770 Jul-01 Hall -- Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $8,637,709 Sep-03 - Hall 'Asbestos abatement $168,222 Aug-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting $42,931 Jul-01 Hall Energy efficient lighting $296,707 Apr-01 Hall Infrastructure improvements $93,657 ' Aug-01 Hall Intercom Feb-01 Hall Security cameras $10,600 Jun-01 2 !II\nll\no ~ z z ,m... !\" -z, m s! ~ \u0026gt; C: 0 ~\no :-n, m 0 ::r:: C: ~ m CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD DECEMBER 18, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED Facility Name I Project Descriotion Cost Henderson Energy efficient lighting $193,679 Henderson Roof replacement gym $107,835 Henderson Asbestos abatement Phase I $500,000  Henderson Asbestos abatement Phase 2 $250,000 IRC Energy efficient lighting I $109,136 --- - Jefferson Asbestos abatement $43,639 Jefferson Renovation \u0026amp; fire alarm $1,630,000 I Laidlaw Parking lot $269,588 Mabelvale Elem. -- ~ ergy monitoring~ystem installation $12,150 Mabelvale Elem. _ Replace HVAC units $300,000 I --- Mabelvale Elem. Asbestos Abatement $107,000 Mabelvale Elem. Energy efficient lighting -1---$106,598 Mabelvale MS , Renovate bleachers $134,793  Mann - Asphalt walks The total $1 .8 million Mann walkway canopies is what has been Mann Boiler replacement used so far on the Mann .Fencing ___J projects listed Mann . Partial demolition/portable classrooms completed for Mann. I McClellan Athletic Field Improvement $38,000 McClellan ---- Irrigation System I $14)50 McClellan Security cameras I $36,300 I McClellan Energy efficient lighting I $303,614 McClellan 1 Stadium stands repair I $235,000 McClellan 'Intercom $46,000 McDermott Energy efficient lighting $79,411 I McDermott --- - 1 Replace roof top HVAC units $476,000 I Meadowcliff Fire alarm $16,175 I Meadowcliff Asbestos abatement $253,412 Meadowcliff Engergy efficient lighting I $88,297 I Metropolitan 1 Replace cooling tower $37,203 Metropolitan Replace shop vent system $20,000 Metropolitan I Energy monitoring system installation $17,145 Mitchell I Energy efficient lighting $103,642 Mitchell Energy monitoring system installation $16,695 Mitchell .Asbestos abatement I $13,000 Oakhurst I HVAC renovation $237,237 Otter Creek , Energy monitoring system installation $10,695 Otter Creek Energy efficient lighting I $81,828 Otter Creek 'Asbestos abatement I $10,000 Otter Creek I Parking lot $138,029 I Otter Creek 16 classroom addition $888,778 I Otter Creek I Parking Improvements $142,541 Parkview HVAC controls $210,000 I Parkview I Roof replacement $273,877 Parkview I Exterior lights $10,784 Parkview I HVAC renovation \u0026amp; 700 area controls $301,938 ' Parkview I Locker replacement $120,000 Parkview Energy efficient lighting $315,000 Procurement Energy monitoring system installation $5,290 Procurement !Fire alarm $25,000 Pulaski Hqts. Elem Move playground $17,000 Est. Completion Date Jul-01 May-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Jul-02 Oct-01 Nov-02 Jul-01 Aug-01 Aug-02 Aug-02 Dec-02 Aug-01 Dec-01 Dec-01 Oct-01 Sep-01 Aug-01 Jul-03 - Jul-03 Jun-01 May-01 Aug-01 Feb-02 Feb-01 Aug-02 Jul-01 Aug-02 Dec-02 Dec-00 May-01 Aug-01 Apr-01 Jul-01 Jul-01 Aug-01 May-01 Apr-01 Aug-02 Aug-02 Oct-02 Aug-03 Jun-02 Sep-01 Nov-00 Aug-01 Aug-01 Jun-01 Jun-02 Aug-03 Dec-02 3 Facility Name Rightsell Rockefeller Rockefeller Rockefeller Romine Romine Security/Transportation Southwest Southwest Southwest Southwest Student Assignment CONSTRUCTION REPORT TO THE BOARD DECEMBER 18, 2003 BOND PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED I Project Description I Cost I Est. Completion Date , Energy efficient lighting $84,898 Apr-01 Energy efficient lighting $137,004 Mar-01 Replace roof top HVAC $539,175 Aug-01 'Parking addition $111,742 Aug-02 Asbestos abatement $10,QQQ 1 Apr-02 Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $3,534,675 I Mar-03 Bus cameras $22,500 Jun-01 Asbestos abatement $28,138 Aug-00 New roof I $690,QQQ 1 Oct-03 Energy efficient lighting $168,719 Jan-02 Drainage I street widening ---1- $250,000 Aug-03 Energy monitoring system installation $4,830 Aug-02 -- Student Assignment Fire alarm $9,000 Aug-03 Tech Center Phase 1 Renovation $275,000 Dec-01 Technology Upgrade 1Upgrade phone system \u0026amp; data I Nov-02 Terry Energy efficient lighting $73,850 Feb-01 Terry Driveway \u0026amp; Parking I $83,484 Aug-02 Terry Media Center addition $704,932 Sep-02 Wakefield  Security cameras I $8,000 Jun-01 Wakefield Energy efficient lighting I $74,776 I Feb-01 Wakefield - Demolition/Asbestos Abatement I $200,0001 Nov-02 Washington Security cameras I $7,900 Jun-01 Washington Energy efficient lighting I $165,281 I Apr-01 Watson Energy monitoring system installation ! $8,530 Jul-01 Watson - IAsbestos abatement I $182,241 Aug-01 Watson Energy efficient lighting I $106,868 I Aug-01 Watson !Asbestos abatement I $10,000 Aug-02 Watson Major renovation \u0026amp; addition $800,000 I Aug-02 Western Hills !Asbestos abatement I $191,946 Aug-02 Western Hills .Intercom $7,100 Dec-01 Western Hills 1 Energy efficient lighting $106,000 I Jul-01 Williams Energy efficient lighting I $122,119 I Jun-01 Wilson I Parking Expansion I $110,0001 Aug-03 Woodruff  Renovation $246,419 I Auq-02 4 !I' ~\no ~z z m r- !'\" -z, m s! ~ \u0026gt; C: 0 ~ Date: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS December 18, 2003 To: Board of Directors @ From: Sandy Becker, Internal Auditor Re: Audit Report - December This is the fiftieth communication regarding status of the current year projects and reviews. Activity Funds a) Working with two middle school and one elementary school to resolve financial issues in their activity funds. b) Reviewing monthly financial information for all schools and assisting in resolving balance issues. c) Training school staff at schools on financial processes by request. Activities Advisory Board (AAB) a) Working with the new Activities Advisory Board to develop plans for the new school year and beyond. b) Assist the Activities Advisory Board in its mission to strengthen the effectiveness and viability of activities in the District. c) Working with the Activities Advisory Board to provide ways to assist the different Booster groups in our schools. Board Policy and Regulation a) Coordinating development of payroll guidelines with Financial Services as part of Financial Services Section of the District Operations Manual. Technology Training a) Monitoring technology plans to determine how use of technology will improve and streamline the workflow for staff persons. a) Served as a trainer for financial portion of Nuts \u0026amp; Bolts, Bookkeeper \u0026amp; Secretaries Training, Security Guard Training, individual school in-service meetings, and others as needed. Working to facilitate best means to improve financial processes and increase accountability for resources. Training new bookkeepers on bookkeeping procedures as requested. !Z'\nll\na:, is z z,m.. . Audit Report - December 2003 Page 2 of 2 b) Placed training material, smart worksheets, and other helpful items on the Teachers Lounge section of the Little Rock School District web page. c) Coordinated guidelines and aids to inform and assist new activity sponsors of specific tasks relating to each activity. Added new checklist for spirit sponsors and smart spreadsheet for fundraiser reconciliation. This information is now in the Teachers Lounge section of the District web page. d) Developed skills test for financial positions. Implementing in coordination with Human Resources. Audit Area Sampling and Review of Financial Procedures Other a) Pulling samples of district expenditures to test for accuracy, accountability, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing district payroll processes for compliance, economy and efficiency, internal controls, and cost control. Working with Financial Services Payroll on internal control and processing issues. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) a) b) c) d) Working with Financial Services on internal controls and rules for payroll processes and implementation of a new interface system. Monitoring other selected risk areas for efficiency, cost effectiveness, and compliance with District policies. Reviewing grant programs. Working with Child Nutrition on implementation of streamlined information processing system with Information Services and Child Nutrition Staff. Working with Information Services on streamlining of data processes regarding SIS reporting. Monitoring cost reduction efforts in the District. Monitoring payroll for compliance with board direction and internal controls. Reviewing leave accountability system. Provided technical assistance to school staff on grant writing. Served as co-chair of Strategic Team One - Financial Resources. Assisted with ShareFest 2003, Saturday, November 1, 2003. Report online at lrsd.org Participating in planning for Day of Caring (April 17, 2004). Problem Resolution a) I have made myself available to help resolve financial issues, assist in improving processes, and help find solutions to questions that arise. Please let me know if you need further information. My telephone number is 501-44 7-1115. My e-mail is sandy.becker@lrsd.org. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 Date: December 18, 2003 TO: Little Rock School District Board of Directors FROM: Lucy Neal, Director Technology and Media Services John Ruffins, Director Computer Information Services THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent Title/Subject Summary Objectives Expected Outcomes Population/Location Budget Amount Managers Duration Long Range/Continuation Technology Report  Read180 software by Scholastic has been implemented at 5 secondary schools: Central, Hall, McClellan, Southwest and Mabelvale Middle. This software supports the Arkansas curriculum frameworks and is designed for students whose reading achievement is below the proficient level. It is integrated into classroom instruction in a way that allows plenty of time for literature and writing. The eleven teachers who are using the Read180 intervention strategies are participating in continuing professional development activities.  Technology issues related to construction projects continue to keep both departments busy. This month we have been working on Mann, Central, and the Technology Center.  The Safari Media Retrieval System will be installed in the new Mann building and teachers will receive training in January and February on the use of the system in instruction.  This month we applied for E-rate funding for the 2004-2005 school year for the wide area network, telephone service (including local, long distance, cellular and paging), network electronics and video distribution systems. To provide an update to the Board of Directors on the status of technology projects To continue to implement the approved technology plan NIA NIA Lucy Neal - Instructional John Ruffins-Technical November 21, 2003 - December 18, 2003 Technology Plan is approved from 2003-2006. !II ~ z~ z m r- !II ,0 m C) C s 0z ,0 m !!:, U) \u0026lt;z5 DATE: TO: FROM: THROUGH: Re: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM LITTLE ROCK, ARKA SAS December 18, 2003 Board of Education w Beverly Williams, Director, Human Resources Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools Personnel Changes lt is recommended that the following personnel changes be approved at the indicated positions, salaries and classifications. In accordance with A.C.A. 6-17-1502, it is recommended that one additional year of probationary status is provided for all teachers who have been employed in a school district in this state for three (3) years. Teachers with an effecti ve date of employment after August 18, 2003 are considered intern teachers. s  :. a, me:\ni:: (/)\nE z om -\u0026lt; (/) m\"' mv, :,om omS\"' C: (\") mm (/) (/) - Personnel Changes Page 2 December 18, 2003 NAME Ammons, Janice Reason: Leaving City Griffin, Laurie Reason: Leaving City Fall, Libasse Hemphill, James 0 E NONE POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignations/Terminations Certified Employees Special Ed 8-13-01 6-14 WOODRUFF 11-15-03 SPE925 Elem I 8-9-00 5-08 CHICOT 12-1-03 TCH925 New Certified Employees Spanish 10-28-03 1-02 CENTRAL TCH925 Spanish 11-20-03 1-05 MCCLELLAN TCH925 Certified Promotion Certified Transfer ANNUAL SALARY 45587.00 38057.00 27056.00 29609.00 ammal 18197.20 prorated Personnel Changes Page 3 December 18, 2003 NAME POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS Resignations/Terminations on-Certified Employees Blythe, Edith Child utntlon 6-11-87 3-16 Reason: Retired CHICOT 12-31-03 FSMGRS Colbert, Harriette Child utrition 12-5-01 3-03 Reason: Personal BALE 12-5-03 FSH550 Davis, Lee Occupational Ther. 8-12-99 60-18 Reason: Health Reasons SPECIAL ED 12-5-03 AN925 Farn1er, Gilbet1 Custodian 9-19-02 3-05 Reason: Personal FAIR 12-11-03 CUS12 Ha1Tis, Paula Child Nutrition 9-1-99 1-05 Reason: one Given HENDERSON 11-11-03 FSH5 Hill, Jerryline Care 1-7-02 1-05 Reason: None Given CARE 10-31-03 CARE Jones, Everett Custodian 1-20-99 1-06 Reason: Tem1inated FRANKLJN 11-17-03 CUS928 Matts, Glenda Instr. Aide 9-26-94 1-10 Reason: Returning To School CHICOT 12-19-03 lNA925 Palmer, Jerry Custodian 1-1-01 1-04 Reason: Personal WOODRUFF 11-13-03 CUS12 Shaw, Al Instr. Aide 2-12-01 1-03 Reason: Personal FAIR 12-15-03 lNA925 ANNUAL SALARY 15030.00 8188.00 50712.00 18381.00 7504.00 6.68 per hr. 12481.00 14067.00 15092.00 11635.00 \u0026gt;,.s.. . a, m c: :I:(/) ,\"-llzo-\u0026lt; m (/) m\"' :mx,\"m' m\n:r:, oS c:O mm \"...' \"' !D 8 z .\u0026gt;.. iz5 (/)\ns \u0026gt;o . C: ~~ ,-0 n c: -\u0026lt; ~\n:r:,i!\n~z \"i5' \"\ni'l z C: (/).0.. 0z !D\n:r:, m Cl C: \u0026gt;... 0z\n:r:, m e\u0026lt;n iz5 0 \"ll\" 8~ ~~ :I:~ i~ r- ~ Personnel Changes Page 4 December 18, 2003 NAME Smith, John Reason: one Given Staggers, Marjorie Reason: Deceased Stokes, Tamara Reason: None Given Taylor, Tannie Reason: None Given Warner, Charlotte Reason: None Given Wight, Linda Reason: Personal Woodus, Sherri Reason: Personal Wyatt, Joyce Reason: Retired Anderson, Leamon POSITION SCHOOL Custodian FOREST HGTS. Child utrition MCCLELLAN Child utrition MCDERMOTT Care CARE Child Nutrition DUNBAR Instr. Aide FRANKLIN Child Nutrition CHILDNUTR. Clerical WILSON START DATE END DATE 4-2-03 12-31-03 9-27-99 11-15-03 8-14-03 11-3-03 11-3-03 11-10-03 9-2-97 10-6-03 8-28-78 11-19-03 8-15-03 10-31-03 8-2-99 1-24-04 SALARY CLASS 1-01 CUS928 3-12 FSH550 3-01 FHS550 3-03 CARE 3-07 FSH550 1-10 INA925 2-01 FSMEAL 39-20 CLKl0 New Non-Certified Emplovees Child Nutrition CHILDNUTR. 11-13-03 1-01 FSH4 ANNUAL SALARY 10329.00 8471.00 8130.00 7.12 per hr. 8316.00 14067.00 11593.00 28764.00 7121.00 annual 4760.67 prorated Personnel Changes Page 5 December 18, 2003 NAME Carpenter, Michael Denham, Nickila Garcia, Martha Hall, Michelle Hervey, Stephanie Jones, Amy Jones, Mary POSITION SCHOOL Care CARE Custodian WILSON Custodian CHICOT Child Nutrition CHICOT Child Nutrition BALE Nurse NURSES Instr. Aide FOREST HGTS. START DATE END DATE 11-17-03 I 0-29-03 10-29-03 10-31-03 10-31-03 11-10-03 11-21-03 SALARY CLASS 4-01 CARE 1-01 CUS12 1-01 CUS928 3-01 FSH550 3-01 FSH550 1-08 NURSES 1-10 INA925 ANNUAL SALARY 6.25 per hr 13399.00 annual 8723.60 prorated 10329.00 annual 7241.53 prorated 8130.00 annual 5775.41 prorated 8130.00 annual 5775.41 prorated 32672.00 annual 21441.00 prorated 14067.00 annual 8744.35 prorated s \u0026gt;: a:, m c: 3:(1) ,\"D- z- om -\u0026lt; (/) m\"' m\"'\nom m::O oc:Sn mm \"...' \"' !Zl 8 z .\u0026gt;.. 0z (/) ~ \u0026gt; (\") . C: ~~ r- (\") oc: -\u0026lt;:: ::o~ ~z \"c5'\"\n' z C: (/)(.\".). 0z !Zl ::0 m C\u0026gt; C: \u0026gt;... 0z ::0 m s (/) cz5 (\") \"D. e: ~ C\u0026gt; ... ~~ !I: 14 i~ r- ~ Personnel Changes Page 6 December 18, 2003 NAME Jordan, Enna Ke1medy, Jarvis Parker, Raushanah Sistrunk, Daplme Smith, Mickie Todd, Freeman Walker, Matthew POSITION SCHOOL Child Nutrition DUNBAR Custodian CENTRAL Child Nutrition GEYER SPRINGS Child Nutrition MCCLELLAN Instr. Aide MABEL VALE EL. Care CARE Custodian CENTRAL START DATE END DATE 10-31-03 10-6-03 11-3-03 11-10-03 11-10-03 11-17-03 10-6-03 SALARY CLASS 3-01 FSH550 1-01 CUS928 3-01 FSH4 3-01 FSH550 1-10 INA925 1-03 CARE 1-01 CUS928 ANNUAL SALARY 8130.00 annual 5775.41 prorated 10329.00 annual 8088.57 prorated 5751.00 annual 4038.62 prorated 8130.00 annual 5597.70 prorated 14067.00 annual 10036.99 prorated 6.43 per hr 10329.00 annual 8083.57 prorated Personnel Changes Page 7 December 18, 2003 NAME Woods, Teresa POSITION SCHOOL Child utrition HALL START DATE END DATE 11-3-03 Non-Certified Promotion SALARY CLASS 3-01 FSH550 Downs, Queen From School Based Security To District Wide Security Non-Certified Transfer Phillips, Penny From Child Nutrition To Financial Services NONE ANNUAL SALARY 8130.00 annual 5730.98 prorated :s ,... . a, m c: il::(I)\nEZ om -\u0026lt; (I) m\u0026lt;n m\u0026lt;n ~m o:S C: (\") mm .(.l.) CI\u0026gt; Personnel Changes Page 8 December 18, 2003 NAME POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS ANNUAL SALARY Personnel Changes Page 9 December 18, 2003 NAME POSITION SCHOOL START DATE END DATE SALARY CLASS ANNUAL SALARY :s \u0026gt;,' mIX c!: :I: en ,\"0- -z om -m\u0026lt; eenn men\nom m\no o:S C: C') mm .e.n.. en 8 ! ~ ezn TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 December 18, 2003 Board of Directors ~nnis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent of Instruction Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent Revision of Policy IKF and Regulations ID-Rand IMP-R to Reflect Change in Arkansas Law Short Summary-Arkansas Act 1748 0f2001 required students in grades K-9 to meet a physical training requirement ofno less than 20 minutes of physical activity three (3) times a week for every student who is physically fit and able to participate. Since that time, Act 1729 of 2003 was approved to change the grade range from K-9 to K-8. Since the K-9 grade span was written in one Board Policy and two (2) Regulations, those three documents are being corrected to reflect the revised requirement of Act 1729. Objectives-To adjust Board Policies and Regulations to reflect changes in State Law Expected Outcomes-Board Policy IKF and Regulations ID-Rand IMP-R will conform with State Law Population-K-8 Student Population ofLRSD Manager-NI A Duration-NI A Long Range/Continuation- NI A Other Agencies Involved-NI A Expectations of Staff-The K-8 staff will continue with current expectations\nhowever, the high schools will no longer have the physical training requirement for grade 9 students. ,.,.s.. . a, m c: -i:.c,,, ,- z om -m\u0026lt;\"\"'' me,,\nom m\n,o 0~ c:m m.... \"' 8 z ~ iz5 \"' !D\n,o 2l C: s iz5\n,o m s \"i5' z Needed Staff- NI A Comments- NI A Recommendations- we recommend approval of these changes in Board Policy and Regulations on first reading to reflect changes in Arkansas Law. Copies of the revised Policy IKF and Regulations ID-Rand IMP-Rare attached. The changes in the policy and regulations were submitted through Linda Austin, who serves as the clearinghouse for Board policy issues. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF GENERAL EDUCATION GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS The Little Rock School District Board of Education believes that students should graduate from high school possessing the skills, knowledge, and attitudes needed for responsible citizenship, life-long learning, and productive employment in our modern economy. Programs for post-secondary preparation will be available to equip students for the advanced training that will be needed for the work of the 21 st century. The Little Rock School District will be responsible for providing the educational opportunities and experiences that will enable our students to take full advantage of post-secondary education and employment opportunities available to them after graduation. Diploma-Earning Options A student may earn a diploma from a Little Rock School District high school in one of four ways. Each has different requirements and different numbers of required units of credit. 1. Diploma from any of the five high schools for completion of the required 24 units for the classes of 2002 and 2003\nor the required 26 units for the class of 2004 and after. 2. Diploma from any of the five high schools for completion of the Little Rock Scholars curriculum of 27 units for the class of 2003\nor 28 units, including at least eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses, for the class of 2004 and after. Hall High School students may take University Studies courses as substitutes for Pre-Advanced Placement and/or Advanced Placement courses. 3. Diploma earned at the Accelerated Learning Center for completion of the 21 units required by the State of Arkansas. 4. Diploma with waived or altered requirements established by an Individual Education Program (IEP) team for a student identified with disabilities. Even though the graduation requirements may be changed by the Board of Education during the time a student is enrolled in high school, the requirements established for a student's graduation class (assuming graduation in four years of high school) are those he/she must meet, even though he/she may require more than four years to earn the necessary number of units. Units of credit will generally be earned in grades nine through twelve, except that one unit of Algebra I (or higher-level mathematics) and Level I (or higher level) of foreign language may be earned in grade eight. High school courses taken before grade eight will not satisfy a unit of credit toward graduation. (See policy IKEC for list of creditearning options.) s  : CD m c: !-I:, ,en ,-z om -m\u0026lt; eenn men\nom m\no oS c:0 mm e..n. en !II !II ill C) C: ~ 0z\no m \u0026lt; en 0z LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF ( continued) Transfer Students All transfer students must meet the graduation requirements of the Little Rock School District in order to receive a diploma. The LRSD high school will accept transfer credits and grades for students who previously attended Arkansas high schools that are accredited by the Arkansas Department of Education or out-of-state high schools that are accredited by their state department of education and/or a regional accreditation organization such as the North Central Association of Schools and Colleges. Additionally, students who transfer into a Little Rock School District high school from a home school must attend at least two semesters in order to receive a high school diploma (see IKED and IKED-R). Former home school students must attend at least four semesters in order to be eligible for rank-in-class (see IKC-R). Foreign Exchange students who complete the senior year in good standing may, at the discretion of the principal, participate in the graduation ceremony. Senior-Year Enrollment Requirements Students participating in dual-credit courses with local colleges/universities during their senior year must be enrolled in high school courses at least half time for their senior year (four units of credit) or full-time during the fall semester in order to receive a diploma from a Little Rock School District high school. This enrollment standard is required regardless of how many credits a student may need to satisfy graduation requirements. (See IKEC-R1 for regulations governing dual-credit enrollments.) Magnet Program Seal Students who participate in the District's high school magnet programs may meet the magnet curriculum requirements through completion of the designated Career Focus courses established for each magnet. In order to receive a Magnet Seal, magnet students must complete fill the requirements of the magnet program. Students transferring into a magnet program after the freshman year may earn a diploma from that high school, but they will not earn the Magnet Seal. Arkansas Scholars Seal A special Arkansas Scholars seal will be affixed to the diploma and transcript of a student who meets the following standards established by the Arkansas Scholars program: 1. Earn a grade of \"C\" or above in all courses. 2. Achieve a 95 percent or better attendance record for each of the four years of high school. 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) 3. Complete high school in eight consecutive semesters. 4. Complete successfully at least three units in science, three units in mathematics, three units of social studies, and four units in English. Honors Diploma Seal A special Honors Seal will be affixed to the diploma and transcript of a student who meets the following standards: 1. Completes the units required for the Little Rock Scholars curriculum, which includes and goes beyond the requirements of the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board for unconditional admission to any public twoyear or four-year institution of higher education in Arkansas and which includes, but goes beyond, the requirements for eligibility for the Arkansas Challenge Scholarship. The Little Rock Scholars curriculum also reflects the admission requirements of the most competitive universities in the United States of America. 2. Successfully completes a minimum of eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses over a four-year period. Hall High School students may take University Studies courses as substitutes for PreAdvanced Placement and/or Advanced Placement courses. Other approved dual-credit courses offered to LRSD students in collaboration with area colleges/ universities may also be substituted for the Pre-AP or AP requirement. 3. Earns a grade-point-average of at least 3.5. Students designated for valedictory or salutatory recognition must have completed the Little Rock Scholars curriculum. Recognition of Graduates Each high school may design its own traditions to commend and celebrate the achievements of the following sets of graduates: 1. the valedictorian and salutatorian\n2. students earning an overall average of 3.5 or above\n3. students earning Magnet Program, Arkansas Scholars, Little Rock Scholars, and/or Honors Diploma Seals\n4. members of the National Honor Society or similar honors organization\n5. scholarship recipients\n6. students with perfect attendance throughout high school\nand 7. students whose other achievements are worthy of special recognition. 3 s ,... . a, me -:l.:,u-, ,..z o-\u0026lt; m (J) mU\u0026gt; m\u0026lt;J\u0026gt;\n:om om:S\"' cO mm u...,.U \u0026gt; !\"' ~ C s 6z\n:o ~ (J) 6z LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKF (continued) Participation in Graduation Ceremony In order to be a participant in the graduation ceremony, the student must be within one unit of completing the graduation requirements and must have paid the tuition for the one-half or one unit to be taken in summer school (or, alternately, in another approved credit-earning program). All high school students and their parents will be informed in writing of this expectation when course lists and graduation requirements are published for the spring registration process. Principals will make a determination of potential graduates at the end of the junior year and each quarter of the students' senior year and inform students and their parents immediately if it is determined that the student is in danger of not graduating. Such students will be advised of all the appropriate credit-earning options, including, but not limited to, evening high school, summer school, correspondence courses, online courses, credit-by-examination, and placement at the Accelerated Learning Center. Award of Diploma The award of the high school diploma will not be made until all graduation requirements are met. Specific Course Requirements The following table specifies the required courses for graduation for each curriculum area. Revised: Adopted: July 22, 1999 4 High School Graduation Requirements Little Rock School District Required, Classes of 2002 and 2003 English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, PreAP, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1 unit Communications I or Debate I Mathematics-3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Science-3 units Physics I (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Required, Classes of 2004 and After English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, PreAP, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications IA (1/2 unit) English Language Arts-1/2 unit One-half unit from any English, Journalism, or Communications course. Modern Grammar (1/2) is stronQIY recommended. Mathematics--3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Geometry (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP) will no longer substitute for Algebra II for the Class of 2007. Effective for the Class of 2007, four (4) units of mathematics are required in Qrades 9-12. Science--3 units Physics I (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) 5 Required, ACC Students English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, PreAP, or AP)\nand English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications IA--one-half unit Mathematics-3 units Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or PreAP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or PreAP) or Statistics (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Science-3 units Physical Science or or Physics I\nand Biology I\nand One additional unit :s ,.. . a, me i:c,, ,-,-:z,om -\u0026lt;\"' m\"' me,, ,:,m m\"' 0~ cm m\"' -\u0026lt; 8 ~ cz5 \"' Required, Classes of 2002 and Required, Class of 2004 and Required, ACC Students 2003 After Social Studies-3 units Social Studies--3 units Social Studies-3 units Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Government or United States Government or United States Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, World History (ESL, Regular, World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP or AP)\nand Pre-AP,or AP)\nand Pre-AP, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, United States History (ESL, United States History (ESL, Regular, or AP) ReQular, Pre-AP, or AP) ReQular, or AP) Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education IA Physical Education IA Physical Education IA Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety Health and Safety Health and Safety Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1/2 unit One unit from art, dance, drama, One unit from art, dance, drama, or music or music Technology-1 unit Technology--1 unit None One unit from any of the One unit from any of the aooroved technoloqy courses. approved technoloqy courses. Career Focus-3 units Career Focus-3 units Career Focus-3 units Three units from any of the At least three units from any of Three units from any of the approved Career Focus the approved Career Focus approved Career Focus proQrams. proqrams. proqrams. Electives-4 units Electives-6 units (5 units, Electives-3 units effective for Class of 2007) A fourth year of both science and social studies is encouraged, as are at least two units of foreiQn language. Total-24 units Total-26 units Total-21 units Although not required to do so, students graduating in 2004 through 2006 are encouraged to complete the requirements for the Class of 2007, especially the four units of mathematics in grades 9-12. 6 Little Rock Scholars Curriculum The Board of Education recommends that students elect the challenge of a more rigorous graduation plan than the minimum requirements, including at least eight Pre-Advanced Placement or Advanced Placement courses (or University Studies courses at Hall High or approved dual-credit courses). Little Rock Scholars, Class of 2003 Little Rock Scholars, Class of 2004 and After English-4 units English-4 units English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand English Ill (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand English IV /ESL, Reaular, or AP). English IV (ESL, Regular, or AP). Oral Communications-1 unit Oral Communications-1/2 unit Communications I Communications IA English Language Arts-1/2 unit Any one-half unit from English, Communications, or Journalism. Modern Grammar is strongly encouraged. Mathematics-4 units Mathematics-4 units (in grades 9-12, class of Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand 20071 Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or Statistics (ESL, Algebra I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Regular, or AP)\nand Algebra II (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Concepts of Geometry (ESL or Regular) or Geometry (ESL, Geometry (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One or more additional units of advanced One additional unit of advanced mathematics. mathematics for the completion of four units in grades 9-12. Science-4 units Science-4 units Active Physics (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nand Active Physics (ESL or Regular) or Physics I Pre-AP\nBiology I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand and Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Biology I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One additional unit Chemistry I (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand One additional unit Social Studies-4 units Social Studies-4 units Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Civics (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP) or United States Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand Government (ESL, Regular, or Pre-AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP or AP)\nand World History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, Regular, or AP)\nand United States History (ESL, Regular, Pre-AP, or AP)\nOne additional unit and One additional unit Foreign Language-2 units Foreign Language-2 units Two units of any one foreign language Two units of any one foreign language Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education-1/2 unit Physical Education IA Phvsical Education IA Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety-1/2 unit Health and Safety Health and Safety Fine Arts-1 unit Fine Arts-1 unit One unit from art, dance, drama, or music One unit from art, dance, drama, or music Technology-2 units Technology-1 unit* Two units from any of the approved technology courses. One unit from any of the approved technology courses. Career Focus-4 units Career Focus-3 units* Four units from any of the approved Career Focus Three units from any of the approved Career Focus proarams. oroarams. Electives-0 units Electives-3 units Total-27 units Total-28 units *Students graduating m 2004 through 2006 are encouraged to take four units of mathematics m grades 9-12, although they are not required to do so since their plan only specified three units of mathematics. If they do choose to take the Class of 2007 plan, they may also reduce the requirements in Technology and Career Focus and have three electives instead of one. 7 :s ~  IXI m c: :-I:c en ,...z om m-\u0026lt; eenn men\nom m\no o:S c:O mm en en -t 8 ~ cz5 en .f.\u0026gt;, z \u0026gt;z n ~ \"' !l0\no m Cl C: s 0z\no m s en cz5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ID-R STUDENT SCHEDULES Grades 9-12 Students in grades 9-12 must be enrolled for four units (eight courses) each semester in a school with an NB block schedule or three and one-half units (seven courses) in a school with a seven-period daily schedule. One unit may be placement in a study hall or enrollment as a student assistant/monitor. The principal is authorized to modify this requirement if there are extenuating circumstances. Extenuating circumstances include the following: 1. The student is enrolled in a concurrent program at a college or university. 2. The student is enrolled in a school-sponsored work program. 3. The student has an illness that precludes full-time enrollment. 4. The student demonstrates a hardship of needing to support self and/or family. 5. The student demonstrates other reasons acceptable to the district inclusive of legal matters. Dropping/Adding Courses, Grades 9-12 According to Arkansas Accreditation Standards, a student must be enrolled in a course for at least 60 clock hours in order to receive one-half unit of credit. Students, therefore, are not permitted to change their class schedules after the tenth class day of each semester to ensure that the school is in compliance. The following exceptions to the ten-day rule are permitted, but only with the high school principal's permission: 1. The student is changing from one teacher's class to another teaching the same course. 2. The student is changing from one level of a course to another, such as from the regular level to the Pre-AP level or from Pre-AP to the regular level. 3. The student is exiting an ESL adapted course in order to move into a mainstreamed equivalent course. 4. The student is dropping a course in order to enroll in a study hall or other non-credit period (only one such period is allowed in any one semester). Grades 6-8 Students must take all courses, including a double period of the Reading/Writing Workshop at each grade level, 6-8, approved by the Board of Education for the required middle school curriculum. Principals may waive the second period of Reading/Writing Workshop at the Pre-AP level at parent request, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the student and without question if the student is performing at the Proficient/ Advanced level on the state Benchmark literacy examination. Courses not required by the State of Arkansas may be waived through the waiver process. (See Policy IBA, IBA-R, and IBA-R Exhibit.) LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ID-R (continued) Additionally, all grades 6-8 students must participate in at least one hour per week of physical training, including at least three sessions of 20 minutes each. (See IMP-R.) Middle schools may schedule classes seven periods a day, or they may elect to use the A/B block schedule, enabling students to take eight courses every two days. Grades 3-5 All students in grades 3-5 must have instruction in all the areas specified in the Arkansas Accreditation Standards. LRSD time requirements are as follows: English Language Arts/Reading 2  hours daily at grade 3\nMathematics Science Social Studies Music or Visual Art Physical Education At least 2 hours daily at grades 4-5 At least one hour daily Daily instruction\nmay be interdisciplinary Daily instruction\nmay be interdisciplinary At least one hour per week At least one hour per week, including no less than 20 minutes three times per week Time requirements that go beyond the Arkansas Accreditation Standards must be observed unless the school applies for and receives a waiver. (See IBA, IBA-R, and IBA-R Exhibit.) Grades PreK-2 All students in grades 3-5 must have instruction in all the areas specified in the Arkansas Accreditation Standards. LRSD time requirements are as follows: English Language Arts/Reading 2  hours daily Mathematics At least one hour daily Science Instruction may be interdisciplinary\nat least Social Studies Music or Visual Art Physical Education every other day, if not every day Instruction may be interdisciplinary\nat least every other day, if not every day At least one hour per week at least one hour per week, including no less than 20 minutes three times per week 2 \u0026gt;,.s..  co m c: !-I.:,(/-) ro-mz -\u0026lt; (/) m\"' m\"' :,om m:,o oS C: 0 mm \"-\u0026lt;' \"' !IJ :,0 m C) C: ~ 0z ~ \u0026lt; 1ii iz5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: ID-R ( continued) Time requirements that go beyond the Arkansas Accreditation Standards must be observed unless the school applies for and receives a waiver. (See IBA, IBA-R, and IBA-R Exhibit.) A sample pre-kindergarten daily schedule is attached that meets all licensing and LRSD requirements. Revised: Date: October 21, 1999 Cross References: Board of Education Policies and Regulations, IBA, IBA-R, ID and IMP-R 3 ID-R: Attachment 1 Request for Waiver of School Day Scheduling Requirements Administrative Regulations ID-R Little Rock School District Name of Student- --------------ID Number- ----- Classification I request a waiver from the scheduling requirements in Administrative Regulations ID-R. I understand that in order to be eligible for such a waiver, I must provide proof of one or more of the following extenuating circumstances:  need to take fewer courses due to poor health (verification by a licensed physician is required)\n need to take fewer courses in order to go to work\n need to take fewer courses due to responsibilities to care for a child or other family member\n need to take fewer courses in order to free a period for remedial instruction or for study hall (verification required by an assistant principal, a counselor, and/or a teacher)\n need to take fewer courses in order to enroll in a post-secondary course (verification required of application to enroll and admission). Therefore, I request that during the next semester/school year (circle one) I be permitted to enroll in only ___ courses rather than the four units of credit required each semester or eight units of credit required for the year. My proof of extenuating circumstances is either attached through signed statements or follows below: Signature of Student Signature of Parent/Guardian Date Approved/Disapproved (circle one) Signature of Principal Date 4 s  : CD m c: :-I:, ,en ro-mz -m\u0026lt; eenn men :am m :a o:S C: 0 mm .e.n. en 8 ~ z en ?' ~ C\u0026gt; C: ~ 6z :0 ~ en \u0026lt;z5 Sample Pre-K Schedule ID-R: Attachment 2 Time Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday 7:30- Arrival/Centers Arrival/Centers Arrival/Centers Arrival/Centers Arrival/Centers 8:00 Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Science Social Studies, Art Studies, Art Studies, Art Studies, Art Studies, Art 8:00- Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time 8:15 Explanation and Explanation and Explanation and Explanation and Explanation and Directions for today's Directions for Directions for Directions for Directions for activities today's activities today's activities today's activities today's activities 8:15- P.E Music Library/Guidance P.E Music 8:45 8:45- Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time 9:30 Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Arts Arts Arts Arts Arts Choice of Centers Choice of Centers Choice of Centers Choice of Centers Choice of Centers Math, Science Social Math, Science Math, Science Math, Science Math, Science Studies, Art Social Studies, Art Social Studies, Art Social Studies, Art Social Studies, Art 9:30- Outside Play: Outside Play: Outside Play: Outside Play: Outside Play: 10:00 Including Including Including Including Including Gross Motor, Art, and Gross Motor, Art, Gross Motor, Art, Gross Motor, Art, Gross Motor, Art, Dramatic Play and Dramatic Play and Dramatic Play and Dramatic Play and Dramatic Play Activities Activities Activities Activities Activities 10:00- Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time 10:45 Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Hands Hands Hands Hands Hands 10:45- Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch 11 :15 Social Skills Social Skills Social Skills Social Skills Social Skills Language Language Language Language Language Development Development Develooment Develooment Develooment 11 :15- Outside Play Outside Play Outside Play Outside Play Outside Play 11 :45 Gross Motor Gross Motor Gross Motor Gross Motor Gross Motor Art Art Art Art Art Dramatic Play Dramatic Play Dramatic Play Dramatic Play Dramatic Play 11 :45- Language Arts/ Language Arts/ Language Arts/ Language Arts/ Language Arts/ 12:15 Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Shared Reading Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Transition Activities Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Bathroom/Wash Hands Hands Hands Hands Hands 12:15- Story Time/Rest Story Time/Rest Story Time/Rest Story Time/Rest Story Time/Rest 1 :15 Period Period Period Period Period 1 :15- Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time Snack Time 2:15 Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Small Group Inst. Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Literacy/Language Arts Arts Arts Arts Arts Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Choice of Centers: Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Including Math, Science, Social Science, Social Science, Social Science, Social Science, Social Studies, and Art Studies, and Art Studies, and Art Studies, and Art Studies, and Art 2:15- Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time Circle Time 2:35 Story Story Story Story Story Review of Review of Review of Review of Review of Activities/Closure Activities/Closure Activities/Closure Activities/Closure Activities/Closure Dismissal Dismissal Dismissal Dismissal Dismissal 5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IMP-R PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING Purpose The purpose of these regulations is to provide guidance to principals and school-level staff on the implementation of Act 17 48 (2001) and Act 1729 (2003). The legislation specifies that: Goals Every kindergarten through grade eight (K-8) public educational institution in this state shall require no less than one hour per week of physical training and instruction which includes no less than twenty minutes of physical activity three times a week for every student who is physically fit and able to participate. The State's goals for this program are as follows:  Improve the health of the state's school children.  Increase knowledge about the health benefits of physical activity and exercise.  Develop behavioral and motor skills that promote a lifelong commitment to healthy physical activity.  Promote health-focused physical activity among children and adolescents\nand  Encourage physical activity outside of physical education. Required Plan for Implementation Each LRSD school must submit a plan to the Associate Superintendent for School Services during check-out in June of each school year for the implementation of this requirement. The plan should be submitted on the attached form. Schools are advised that their compliance with this law will be monitored both by the District and the Standards Review team from ADE. The law requires that \"each school will develop a physical education program which fits effectively and efficiently into the school's existing organization while incorporating the goals of this act.\" Staffing The law does not require that any school or district hire staff who are certified in physical education to supervise students' participation in these activities. Guidelines for Schools According to the ADE Director's memorandum of August 21, 2001 , the following activities are acceptable in complying with the law:  general calisthenics during a home-room period\ns  a=, m c: .ii.l,:C -J\u0026gt; or-mz -\u0026lt; Cl) m\"' mCJ\u0026gt;\nom m::O oS c:O mm \"-I' \"' 8 z g z Cl) .f.l, z  nz ! !:D ::0 !!l c:: s 0z ::0 m \u0026lt; cii cz5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IMP-R ( continued)  organized activities during recess periods or lunch periods (if scheduled for at least 20 minutes)\n organized school athletics\n organized play that engages all students in ways to meet legal requirements\n walking nature trails. Elementary School Elementary schools will design their master schedules to ensure that all K-5 students participate in physical training according to the requirements of Act 17 48. Middle School Middle schools may meet the requirements of Act 17 48 in one of the following ways: A. All grade 6 students will continue to be required to take a full year of physical education/health. Students in grades 7-8 who are not eligible for a waiver from the list below will be enrolled in a physical education course. B. One semester equivalent of physical education (taught on alternating days throughout the school year) and paired with Keyboarding in grade 6, Arkansas History in grade 7, and Career Orientation in grade 8 will be required of all students in grades 6-8. Schools with block schedules will split one 90-minute class on alternating days between the physical education course and the appropriate one-semester required course. C. One semester equivalent of physical education (taught on alternating days throughout the school year and paired with Keyboarding in grade 6, Arkansas History in grade 7, and Career Orientation in grade 8 will be required of all students in grades 6-8 who are not eligible for one of the waivers listed below. D. All students in grades 6-8 will participate in a school-organized physical training program for a minimum of twenty minutes three times per week or a total of one hour per week. The following categories of students may be waived from participation in the scheduled activities in either Plan A or Plan C above, provided that the identified activities for the waiver involve a minimum of one hour per week of physical activity, not an average of one hour per week. The waiver is in effect only for the duration of the students' participation in the identified activities. 1. Students participating in marching band during the fall semester. 2. Students enrolled in dance courses at Mann Magnet Middle School. 3. Students who are participants in organized cheerleading activities. 4. Students who are participants in a drill team during the fall semester. 5. Students engaged in an in-school or after-school athletic program. 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IMP-R (continued) 6. Students who walk to and/or from school, if the walk requires at least one hour per week and provided that the parent/guardian documents each week that the student walked to and/or from school. 7. Students who are engaged in an after-school recreational program sponsored by the school or other organization, if physical activities are scheduled for at least one hour per week. 8. Students who provide written documentation from the provider of at least one hour per week of physical activity or training in a private or community-based program. Students with Disabilities The law requires that \"suitable modified courses shall be provided for students physically or mentally unable or unfit to take the course or courses prescribed for other students.\" Adapted activities must be included in the students' IEP or 504 plans. Revised: Date: February 28, 2002 3 s ,.... 'Ill me: .31,: ,en ,-z om -m\u0026lt; eenn men\nom m:O oS c::O mm e-n. en f\u0026gt; 'Tl z ~ (\") ~ \"' !J' ~ c:: ~ 0z\no m \u0026lt; en cz5 School Plan for Implementation of Act 1748 Physical Education Training and Instruction Name of School School Year ----------------- ---- Signature of Principal _______________ Date ____ _ 1. Describe below, by grade level (K-5 or 6-8), how your school will provide the mandated physical education training and instruction each week for all students who do not have waivers. 2. State, by grade level, who the staff members are who will supervise the activities at the elementary or middle school level. 3. What is your school's plan for documenting the following? A. Students with waivers (middle and high schools) B. Students requiring adapted activities ________________ _ Approved, Assoc. Supt. for School Services Date Approved, Assoc. Supt. for Instruction Date 4 Application for Waiver of Act 1748 Physical Training Requirements Middle School, 2002-2003 Student- ------------------ID Number- ------ Grade Level- --------- Team Name- ----------- In 2001 the Arkansas General Assembly passed and the Governor signed legislation (Act 1748) which specifies that \"Every kindergarten through grade 8 public educational institution in this state shall require no less than one hour per week of physical training and instruction which includes no less than twenty minutes of physical activity three times a week for every student who is physically fit and able to participate.\" I request that my child be allowed to waive required participation in a physical education course/activity designed to meet Act 1748 requirements. I have checked below the activity in which my child participates that would make him/her eligible for this waiver: 1. Students participating in marching band during the fall semester. 2. Students enrolled in dance courses at Mann Magnet Middle School. 3. Students who are participants in organized cheerleading activities. 4. Students who are participants in a drill team during the fall semester. 5. Students engaged in an in-school or after-school athletic program. 6. Students who walk to and/or from school, if the walk requires at least one hour per week and provided that the parent/guardian documents each week that the student walked to and/or from school. 7. Students who are engaged in an after-school recreational program sponsored by the school or other organization, if physical activities are scheduled for at least one hour per week. 8. Students who provide written documentation from the provider of at least one hour per week of physical activity or training in a private or community-based program. I agree to notify the school immediately ifmy child ceases to participate in the activity (which I checked above) to make him/her eligible for this waiver. Parent/Guardian Signature ____________________ _ Date ________________ _ 5 \u0026gt;~  a, me: ~~\"z' om -m\u0026lt;\"\"'' men\n,om m\n,o 0~ c::m r...n. \"' !:D ill Cl C: ~ 0z\n,o ~ \"cz5 ' TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 December 18, 2003 Board of Directors Wenrus Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent of Instruction Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent Revision of Regulation IKC-R to Clarify Section on Re-taking a Course that was Originally Passed and to Add a Section on Translating Grades of Transfer Students Short Summary-the proposed revision will clarify Regulation IKC-R for Policy IKC on Class Rankings/Grade-Point Averages. Previously, Regulation IKC-R stated that students who make a \"C\" or \"D\" may retake a course to strengthen understanding and skills needed for advanced study and that \"the second grade will replace the first grade in the calculation of the grade-point average and rank-in-class.\" The proposed revision will change that language to, \"the higher grade will be used in the calculation of the grade-point average and rank-in-class.\" Rarely, but occasionally, a student will retake a class and make a lower grade or even fail the class the second time. The regulation, as currently written, would disallow the first grade and would record the lower grade or failed grade on the transcript and use it in calculating GP A. If the class is failed the second time, the current regulation would require the student to retake the course a third time to gain a passing grade even though the original grade was passing. The proposed revision will give more encouragement to students to improve their understanding and skills in a course without fear of losing credit for the passed course or having the GP A lowered. The second part of the revision will add a section to clarify how transfer grades are to be recorded if they are not reported to us in the same format used by LRSD. Some schools report grades in percentages rather than in letter grades\nconsequently, those percentage grades must be translated for calculating grade point average and class rank. The percentage grades will be translated using the LRSD grading scale. Objectives-!) to allow students to count the higher grade for a course re-taken to strengthen understanding and skills\n2) to provide a procedure for translating grades reported to LRSD in a format different from the one used in the district. s ,..... . a, m c: 31: en ,\"-Dz- om -m\u0026lt; eenn men\n,om m:io oS C: C') mm en en -\n.r.\u0026gt;, z  z C') ~ en Expected Outcomes- 1) to be more \"user friendly\" to students who are willing to retake a course passed with a grade of\"C\" or \"D\"\n2) to give schools direction on translating transfer grades reported in a different format from that used by LRSD. Population-Grades 8-12 Student Population of LRSD Manager-NI A Duration-NI A Long Range/Continuation- NI A Other Agencies Involved-NI A Expectations of Staff- N/ A Needed Staff-NIA Comments-NI A Recommendations-we recommend approval of these changes in Board Regulation IK.CR A copy of the revised Regulation IKC-R is attached. The changes in the regulation were submitted through Linda Austin, who serves as the clearinghouse for Board policy issues. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R CLASS RANKINGS/GRADE-POINT AVERAGES All grades, except those noted in the \"exceptions\" below, earned for high school courses, including excess elective units, will be used in calculating the grade-point average and rank-in-class. Grades included in the computation are as follows: 1. Grades earned for high school courses, whether taken in the regular day, evening school, or summer school program. 2. Grades earned in alternative education programs, including those in LRSD, administered by school districts or other organizations which are accredited through their state department of education or a regional accreditation organization, such as North Central Association of Schools and Colleges (NCA). 3. Transfer grades from accredited schools outside the Little Rock School District. 4. Algebra I (or higher-level mathematics course) and Level I foreign language (or higher-level foreign language course) taken in eighth grade. 5. Only one (1) unit of physical education. (One-half unit is required\none-half unit may count as an elective. Therefore, only the grades for one unit of physical education will be computed in the grade-point average.) 6. Grades earned in approved concurrent credit college courses offered in cooperation with institutions of higher education {see IKEC-R1 ). 7. Grades earned in summer enrichment programs conducted by institutions of higher education, if the course and credit were approved by the District (see IKEC-R1). 8. Failing grades, unless the courses was retaken and passed (see Exceptions, #1 ). 9. Grade earned for one semester of Driver Education taken from an accredited high school. 10. Grades earned on credit-by-examination to make up failed courses (see IKEC-R3). 11. Passing grade earned on advancement-by-credit for Keyboarding (see IKEC-R6). 12. Grades earned in the District's home-bound programs. 13. Grades earned in approved correspondence courses (see IKEC-R2). 14. Grades earned in approved on-line or distance-learning courses (see IKECR5). 15. Courses in which a student earns an NC (no credit due to excessive absences), unless a course was retaken and passed (see Exceptions, s . a=, m c:\nl:CI) ,-...,.z- om -\u0026lt;\"' m\"' m\n,om\"' omS\"' c:n mm .\"..' \"' 8 z ~ i5 z \"' .~., z  nz ~ \"' LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R (continued) #1 ). (Regardless of the student's grade in a course for which he/she earns an NC, the NC, which equals O points, replaces the grade and is used in the calculation of the grade-point average. Exceptions The following grades will not be included in the computation of the grade-point average or rank-in-class: 1. Failing grades (or courses in which students earned an NC for nonattendance) for those courses retaken and passed ( effective for all grades 9- 12 students in fall 2001 ), regardless of when the student failed the course). 2. The lower grade of courses retaken to improve understanding and skills ( effective for all students re-taking courses previously passed from fall 2004 onward). 3. Grades in courses taken through home schools or in unaccredited schools. 4. Grades on district-administered examinations to determine credit for transfer students from home schools or unaccredited schools. 5. Grades earned in external rehabilitation programs and correctional programs that are not accredited by a state department of education or a regional accreditation organization such as North Central Association or Schools and Colleges (NCA). 6. Courses with grades of \"pass\" or \"fail\" or \"satisfactory\" or \"unsatisfactory.\" 7. Grades in courses that are officially \"dropped\" with the permission of the principal. 8. Grades or credits in below-level or remedial courses. 9. Grades for religion courses taken in non-public schools that are in excess of one-semester equivalent of the LRSD course in Bible as/in Literature. 10. A failing grade earned in Keyboarding in the advancement-by-credit program. 11. Non-credit courses such as Athletics, Office Monitor, Student Council, etc. Re-Enrollment in Courses Effective fall 2004, in order to strengthen understanding and skills needed for advanced study, students may retake a course in which they have previously earned a passing grade of \"D\" or \"C,\" including mathematics and foreign language courses taken for high school credit in grade 8. The grade will be recorded on the transcript, and the higher grade will be used in the calculation of the grade-point average and rank-in-class. A student may make up a failed course, as well as a course in which a student earned an NC, in several ways-retake the course during the regular day, evening high school, or summer school\nearn credit for a failed course through credit-by-examination\nand/or retake the failed course through correspondence, on-line, or distance learning. In any 2 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R (continued) case, both the grade for the failed course and the grade for the retaken course or creditby- examination will be recorded on the transcript, but only the higher grade will be used in calculating the grade-point average and rank-in-class. A student retaking a course he/she failed due to excessive absences does not have the option of credit-by-examination. A student retaking a course which he/she previously passed does not have the option of summer school or credit-by-examination. Assessment of Transcripts for Transfer Students Transcripts are official records of the culmination of each student's educational experience on the secondary level. Therefore, it is vital that all final grades earned in grades 6-12 be shown in the transcript history, regardless of where they were earned. This is absolutely essential in grades 9-12 in order for cumulative GPA's, credits, and rankings to be accurate. It is the responsibility of the transferring student and his/her parent/guardian to provide the necessary releases, clearances, and information required to obtain an official transcript from the previous school. Upon the receipt of the official transcript, all final grades indicated on that transcript should be transferred exactly as shown to the Little Rock School District's transcript history. The course descriptions shown for each final grade should also be entered as shown. When possible the name of the school should be shown above the grades. Only final grades are entered in the transcript history. Transfer or interim grades or withdrawal grades from other schools should not be entered unless they are final grades. The LRSD uses letter grades, not percentages on transcripts. If the official transcript received from another school shows only percentages, the percentage should be converted to a letter grade using the key provided by the previous school. If no conversion key is provided or obtainable, the percentages shown will be converted to the letter grade indicated on the Arkansas State Grading Scale. Transfers from Home Schools and/or Unaccredited Schools Students who transfer into a Little Rock School District from home schools or schools that are not accredited through a state department of education or a regional accreditation organization such as North Central Association of Schools and Colleges (NCA) must attend the accredited high school for a minimum of four semesters in order to be eligible for rank-in-class calculations. Only the courses taken at the accredited high school will be used in calculating the grade-point average. 3 s ,... . a, m c: :-1a1:c-n ,-z o-\u0026lt; m Cl) mme\"n'\nam m\n:a o:S c:O mm .\"..' \"' !II LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R (continued) Transfer Students' Weighted Grades Weights assigned to grades from other districts or schools for courses that are not Advanced Placement courses, or \"honors\" courses approved for that school district by the Arkansas Department of Education, or dual high school and college credit courses approved by the Arkansas Department of Education for weighted-grade status will not be honored by any LRSD high school in the calculation of the grade-point average or rank-in-class. (See Arkansas Rules and Regulations on \"Uniform Grading Scales for Public Secondary Schools.) Transfer Students from Foreign Schools Foreign exchange students not seeking a diploma from an LRSD high school will not be eligible for rank-in-class. Computing the Grade-Point Average and Rank-in-Class In determining the grade-point average and rank-in-class, the following scale will be used. Also, grades earned in concurrent credit college courses, unless they have been approved for weighted-grade or honors status by the Arkansas Department of Education, will be assigned the following numeric values when such courses are used to compute a student's grade-point average. A= B= C= D= F= NC= 90-100 = 80-89 = 70-79 = 60-69 = 59 and below = 4 points 3 points 2 points 1 point O points 0 points The following scale will be used for Advanced Placement courses, as well as for dual credit courses approved by the Arkansas Department of Education for weighted-grade status, whether taken in LRSD or other districts. It will also be used for \"honors\" courses approved by the Arkansas Department of Education for students who have transferred in from other districts. (See \"Transfer Students' Weighted Grades\" above.) A= B= C= D= F= NC= 90-100 = 80-89 = 70-79 = 60-69 = 59 and below = 5 points 4 points 3 points 2 points O points O points 4 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R (continued) Rank-in-Class The student's rank-in-class will be computed each year in grades 9 and 10 and each semester in grades 11 and 12 and will be available upon request for information to the students and to his/her parent(s)/guardian(s). Although tentative ranking of seniors is done at the end of the seventh semester for college admission, scholarship applications, and/or recognition programs conducted before graduation, the final ranking of seniors will be computed at the end of the eighth semester when semester grades are reported. When a seventh-semester rank-in-class is provided by a Little Rock School District high school official, the high school must include the information that the final rank in class is established at the end of the eighth semester. Release of Information Rank-in-class information will be released to appropriate school, college, or university personnel or to others only at the request or consent of the student, or the parent if the student is a minor, or in response to a judicial order or pursuant to any lawfully issued subpoena. Senior Honors Ties in Rank-in-Class (Effective for the Classes of 2000, 2001, and 2002) In the event two or more students tie for valedictory or salutatory honors, both (or more) students will receive equal recognition. For purposes of award of any valedictory scholarship following the eighth-semester calculations of rank-inclass, the student with the highest total number of grade points will be declared the valedictorian. If a valedictory scholarship is awarded prior to the end of the eighth semester, then the seventh semester calculations will be used to make the determination. Class of 2003 and Beyond Effective for the Class of 2003, in order to be eligible for honors recognition at graduation, the graduating student must have completed the \"Recommended Curriculum,\" successfully completed at least eight advanced courses (PreAdvanced Placement, Advanced Placement, and/or University Studies courses)\nand achieved a grade-point average of at least 3.5 (see IKF.). Each high school will establish its own traditions for recognizing and awarding honors graduates and their parents. 5 s :,,.:. a, m c: :-l.:.u-, or-mz m-\u0026lt; \"\"'' mu,\nom m::O oS c:O mm \"-\u0026lt;' \"' 8 ! iz5 \"' .f\u0026gt;., z z\u0026gt; 0 ~ u, LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT NEPN CODE: IKC-R (continued) Definition: Unaccredited School An unaccredited school is a school that has not earned accreditation status by a state department of education or through a regional accreditation organization, such as North Central Association of Schools and Colleges. Credits from home schools and/or unaccredited schools are generally not transferable to accredited schools except through credit-by-examination programs. Definition: Concurrent Credit College Courses Concurrent credit college courses are courses that are offered and taught under the direction of an accredited institution of higher education. Students receive both high school and college credit for successful completion. Implementation Date The provisions of these regulations are effective for the class of 2000, except that the regulations on Senior Honors are effective for the class of 2003. (See also IKF.) Notification These regulations will be published annually in the High School Course Selections publication. Revised: Date: October 21, 1999 Cross References: Board of Education Policy IKC, Administrative Regulations IKEC-R1 through IKEC-R6, Board of Education Policy IKF and Arkansas Uniform Grading Scales for Public Secondary Schools 6 TO: FROM: THROUGH: SUBJECT: LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 December 18, 2003 Board of Directors --::6ennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent Dr. Morris Holmes, Interim Superintendent Program Evaluation for Mathematics and Science Short Summary-The Board is asked to review and approve the Program Evaluation for Mathematics and Science. Objectives-1) to improve the education for all students by evaluating selected programs each year to determine their impact on student achievement, 2) to comply with the requirement of section 2. 7 .1 of the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan to submit for District Court Approval the program evaluations listed. Expected Outcomes-Programs will be maintained, adjusted, or eliminated based on the recommendations of these long-term program evaluations. Population-The Mathematics and Science Program Evaluation Team consisted of Dr. Don Wold, Vanessa Cleaver, Dennis Glasgow, and Dr. Ed Williams. Dr. Steve Ross, external program evaluation consultant, reviewed the Program Evaluation and provided feedback. Staff and teachers will use this evaluation as a benchmark for future program decisions. Budget Amount/Source of Budget-Staff members' time and materials are included as a part of the regular operating budget for the Math/Science Department. Dr. Ross' consultant contract is included in the PRE budget. Managers-Dennis Glasgow, Interim Associate Superintendent for Instruction, and Dr. Ed Williams, Statistician Duration-Formal end-of-year evaluative reports have been submitted to the National Science Foundation for the past five years. The Program Evaluations for the four years, 1998-99 through 2001-02, were submitted to the Board and approved in December, 2002. The evaluation process has continued through the first semester of SY 2003-04, and this s ~ o:, m c: -:I:,: ,en ,-z om -m\u0026lt; eenn men\nom m\no oS C: C') mm en en -\u0026lt; report reflects 5-6 years of data, although the past three years were used to measure student achievement goals for the CPMSA Project per guidance from NSF. Analysis of and response to the program evaluations will continue through the spring semester of 2004 and for the next few years as additional data is gathered. Long Range/Continuation-all program evaluations are used as a benchmark for program planning in future years. The current formal Mathematics and Science Program Evaluation will conclude with the approval of the Board and the District Court. Other Agencies Involved-The Office of Desegregation Monitoring has monitored the program evaluation process. Expectations of Staff-Staff members from the Mathematics and Science Departments, the CPMSA Office, and PRE served on the evaluation teams for this program evaluation. Program evaluation is embedded in the job expectations of staff\nconsequently, this is an ongoing commitment for our staff. An important job of the mathematics/science evaluation team is to read the evaluation report, analyze it, and use that information to help decide our future direction in the areas of mathematics and science. Needed Staff-Dr. Wold was employed as the CPMSA Program Evaluator using funds from the NSF grant. Dr. Ross' review of the evaluation was part of his consultant contract. Mathematics and science staff members participated in the evaluation as part of their day to day job duties. Comments-the two literacy evaluations approved by the Board in November and the math/science program evaluation currently under consideration are the three remaining evaluations from section 2. 7 .1 of the LRSD Revised Desegregation and Education Plan. Dr. Steve Ross was contracted as a program evaluation specialist to develop the program evaluations of the two literacy program and to review the mathematics and science program evaluation. All three program evaluations provide useful information for staff as we chart our future course in these curricular areas. Recommendation-we recommend approval of program evaluation for Mathematics and Science. The Executive Summary is attached. The full report will be provided for Board Members at the Agenda Meeting. Dr. Don Wold, Program Evaluator, will be available for a presentation to the Board and to answer questions. Executive Summary This report examines student assessments over a five-year period in the Little Rock School District (LRSD) from 1998 to 2003. The report also looks at course taking and completion trends over the five years in mathematics and science courses, along with policy issues and curriculum changes. The five year period was selected because LRSD had a grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF) over that period of time to create systemic change in mathematics and science programs that would lead to increased student achievement and preparation of more students to pursue undergraduate programs of study in mathematics, science, and engineering. The LRSD program, funded by NSF, was Comprehensive Partnerships for Mathematics and Science Achievement (CPMSA). The effective date of the CPMSA program was September l, 1998, and the expiration date for this program was August 31, 2003 . The program evaluation was oriented around the following questions concerning all students and African-American students in particular:  Was the CPMSA program effective in improving the achievement of African American students?  Have levels of achievement changed for all students and for African American students who perform at or above basic, at or above proficient, and at or above the advanced achievement level?  Have enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and for African American students in 8th grade Algebra 1?  Have the enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and African American students in G 9-12 mathematics gate-keeping courses (Algebra I, Geometry, Trig/Pre-Cale., \u0026amp; Calculus)?  Have enrollments and completion trends changed for all students and for African American students in G 9-12 science gate-keeping courses (Biology 1, Chemistry 1, and Physics I)?  Has the number of students with SEM proficiency changed? How has the number of African American students with SEM proficiency changed? (SEM proficiency is defined as students who have completed a minimum of pre-calculus, biology, and chemistry and/or physics courses).  What policy changes have promoted equal access by all students, including African American students to high quality education?  What policy changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation?  What curriculum and instruction changes were made to support student success in mathematics and science during CPMSA implementation?  What professional development policy and program changes were made to support teachers during CPMSA implementation?  What standards-based assessment system changes were made during CPMSA implementation? Method The evaluation design was based on quantitative student achievement data from over 100 examinations in twenty-four different assessment groups, which took place in LRSD from 1998 to 2003. The cooperative agreement with the NSF (Amendment No. 3) states that assessment data for the CPMSA Program for Years 3, 4, and 5 will be used to determine annual increases in performance\nconsequently, the primary focus was on achievement data for SY 2000-2001, 2001-2002, and 2002-2003. Literacy \u0026gt;,..s..  a:, m c: :I: CJ) \"rD- -z om -\u0026lt; CJ) men men :om m :o oS C: 0 mm u,CJ\u0026gt; -I 8 ! lz5 CJ) ~ 0 5 CJ) z C) ~ I CJ) ?\u0026lt; o\u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026lt; ._::c 0~ C: :0 ~z :I: C) men :!i assessments were included along with mathematics and science assessments since literacy is a critical component to achievement in mathematics and science. The analysis follows procedures used in evaluative studies by Systemic Research, Inc., which has been funded by the NSF. Systemic Research has identified and tabulated indicators of systemic change for use in program evaluations. Following terminology of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), student performance on the assessments was described in terms of achievement levels. The NAEP described student performance in terms of percentage at or above one of three achievement levels: Basic, Proficient, or Advanced. These achievement levels are shown below. 100 Advanced Range (75-99) Advanced Achievement Level (75) Proficient Range (50-74) Proficient Achievement Level (50) Basic Range 25-49) Basic Achievement Level (25) Below Basic Range {0-24) 0 Performance at or above Basic achievement level (25-99) Performance at or above Proficient achievement level (50-99) Performance at or above Advanced achievement level (75-99 For each assessment each year, the percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level, and the percentage of students who performed at or above the Proficient level were computed. In subsequent years two additional quantities were computed: (1) the CHANGE in percentage of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level and (2) the CHANGE in the percentage of students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level. In terms of student performance, a positive change in (1) indicates movement from below the Basic achievement level to or above the Basic achievement level, the Proficient achievement level, or the Advanced achievement level. A positive change in (2) indicates movement from below the Proficient achievement level to or above the Proficient achievement level or above the Advanced achievement level. In addition, enrollment in mathematics and science courses and completion trends were examined for the five years. Completion as defined in the CPMSA Cooperative Agreement is the number of students who completed the course with a grade of A, B, or C. Special attention was given to \"gate-keeping\" and higher-level mathematics and science courses. \"Gate-keeping\" courses are those that students must successfully complete as pre-requisites to higher-level, more rigorous courses. Finally, the adoption of policies, curricula, and assessments necessary to foster the implementation of standards-based mathematics and science programs was examined. Standards-based programs are those that are very closely aligned with local, state, and national standards. High-stakes mathematics and science assessments, such those that are part of the Arkansas Comprehensive Testing, Assessment, and Accountability Program are aligned with state and national standards\ntherefore, program alignment with standards is a powerful means of improving student achievement. Results Achievement Student data from over 100 examinations were used in the study of twenty-four assessment groups to determine whether a percentage increase in the number of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level or above the Proficient achievement level or both above Basic achievement level and above Proficient achievement level occurred for all students, for Caucasian students, and for AfricanAmerican students. The assessment groups are summarized below: 1 English G8 EXPLORE 9 Mathematics G8 Benchmark 17 Reading G8 EXPLORE 2 English G 10 PLAN 10 Mathematics G8 EXPLORE 18 Reading G 10 SA T-9 3 Literacy G4 Benchmark 11 Mathematics G 10 SAT-9 19 Reading Gl0 PLAN 4 Literacy G8 Benchmark 12 Mathematics G 10 PLAN 20 Science G5 SA T-9 5 Mathematics G4 Benchmark 13 Algebra I G7-10 Benchmark 21 Science G7 SA T-9 6 Mathematics G5 SA T-9 14 Geometry G9-11 Benchmark 22 Science G8 EXPLORE 7 Mathematics G6 Benchmark 15 Reading G5 SA T-9 23 Science Gl0 SAT-9 8 Mathematics G7 SAT-9 16 Reading G7 SAT-9 24 Science G 10 PLAN The Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Basic Achievement Level Table 32 shows only the change in percentage points of students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level for all students in the District, for Caucasian students, and for African American students. Here we see that in 16 out of 24 assessments. the change in percentage points of African American students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level was greater than the change in percentage points of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Basic achievement level. These results may be seen in Figure lS below. The Annual Change in Percentage Points of Students Who Performed at or Above the Proficient Achievement Level Table 33 shows only the change in percentage points of students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level for all students in the District, for Caucasian students, and for African American students. Here we see that in 18 out of 24 assessments. the change in percentage points of African American students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level was less than the change in percentage points of Caucasian students who performed at or above the Proficient achievement level. These results may be seen in Figure 2S below. From the assessments in Tables 32 and 33, we conclude that, although there are increasing numbers of African American students at or above the Proficient achievement level, the greatest movement in African American student performance is upward from below the Basic achievement level into the region between the Basic achievement level and the Proficient achievement level. If the current momentum is maintained, student performance of African American students will continue to move upward to or above the Proficient achievement level. In the SMART/THRIVE 2002-2003 program, we found 52 percent of those students performing above the Basic achievement level but below the Proficient achievement level. With such a large number of students performing just below the Proficient achievement level, many more students could reach the Proficient achievement level with reasonable additional effort on the part of the students and teachers. From these data we conclude that the performance of African-American students on district assessments improved substantially and consistently between 2001and 2003. s ,....  a, m c: 31:(1) \",D.. .-z o-\u0026lt; m(/) m(I) m(I)\nom m::O o:S C: (\") mm (..I.) (/) !D .f.\u0026gt;, z  z (\") ~ ~ (\") 0 (/) z C\u0026gt; Rl I u, Memorandum Date: To: From: Through: December 18, 2003 Little Rock School District Board of Directors Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools ~art, Chief Financial Officer Prepared By: Darral Paradis, Director of Procurement \u0026amp; Materials Management Subject: Employee Request to Conduct Business with the District Subject Employee Request to Conduct Business with the District in compliance with AR Statute 6-24-101:119 (Act 1599 of2001)-Ms. Jennie Cooper, Central High School. Summary: The statute above precludes a school district employee from contracting with the public educational entity employing him or her if the employee has knowledge that he or she is directly interested in the contract. \"Directly Interested\" means: receiving compensation or other benefits personally or to a business or other entity in which the individual has a financial interest. \"Financial Interest\" means: 1. Ownership of more than a five percent (5%) interest\n2. Holding a position as an officer, director, trustee, partner, or other top level management\nor 3. Being an employee, agent, independent contractor, or other arrangement where the individual's compensation is based in whole or in part on transactions with the public educational entity. Ms. Cooper has completed a disclosure form notifying the District that she is owner of Soccer Plus. Objective: Ms. Cooper wishes to sell to the District and is requesting an exception to the law above. See her letter attached. .r.\u0026gt;, z \u0026gt;z n ~ U\u0026gt; Board of Directors December 18, 2003 Page 2 Expected Outcomes: NIA Population/Location: Little Rock School District and specifically Central High School Budget Amount/Source of Budget: NIA Manager: Darral Paradis, Director, Procurement and Materials Management Duration: NIA Long Range: NIA Other Agencies Involved: NIA Expectations of District: NIA Needed Staff: NIA Comments: None Recommendation We request the Board of Education review and make a decision regarding Ms. Cooper's attached request. 2 Paradis, Darral From: Jennie Cooper Uennie@soccerpluslr.com] Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 6:1 0 PM To: Paradis, Darral Fred Cooper and I , Jennie Cooper , own Soccer Plus, one of two soccer stores in Central Arkansas and one of the few soccer specific stores in the State. I am an Art History teacher at Little Rock Central High as well as head of the soccer program and coach of the men's soccer team. Soccer Plus requests the Board's approval to allow Soccer Plus to be an approved bidder of soccer supplies and equipment to the Little Rock School District. It also requests that it be allowed to sell soccer uniforms and equipment to the Central High Soccer program. The Athletic Department provides the Men's and Women's soccer teams a budget of $500.00 each per year for supplies and equipment. The balance of the needs of the teams is covered by the Booster Club which raises funds through parental contributions and sponsorships, and other fundraising activities like the Black and Gold game. Booster Club funds are often tight. We don't want to spend any more for needed items than necessary and would like those funds to buy as much equipment as possible. Soccer Plus is able to sell to the Central soccer program at cost plus 10%. The Central Soccer program can not get these prices anywhere else, but can get them from Soccer Plus with a resolution from the Board . What I am requesting at this time is Board approval tor Soccer Plus to supply the Central High Soccer program with equipment and to be able to bid on soccer supplies for the Little Rock School District. Thank you, Jennie Cooper 12/8/2003 ?\u0026lt; \u0026gt;o\u0026gt;\u0026lt; c.. :c 0~ C::\no ~z ii: C) men :!'j LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 DATE: TO: December 18, 2003 Board of Education FROM: ~al Paradis, Director of Procurement and Materials Mgmt. THROUGH: Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: Donations of Property Attached are requests to donate property to the Little Rock School District as follows: School/DeQartment Item Donor Central High School TV, DVD player, 5 videos Paul and Corky Schroeder and 5 DVDs, valued at approximately $400.00, to Central's 504 Program Central High School Corky's Barbeque, valued Kevin and Cathy Crass at $574.36, catered to the Central Tiger Football Team Central High School $250.00 cash to Central's Deborah Brooks baseball boosters Central High School Hewlett Packard Laserjet Dr. Randal Hundley IV printer valued at $300.00 Forest Park Elementary Antique french bench Dr. Reid and Susan Henry School valued at $1,915.00 of Cobblestone and Vine f.\u0026gt;., z \u0026gt;z (\") ~ Cl) ~ ,(\"-) 0 Cl) z C) ~ '\n=:o\n,,\nCl) Board of Education December 18, 2003 Page 2 School/Department Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School Shirts, valued at approximately $350.00, and 50 hours volunteer service to Parkview's Golf Team Steve and Debbie Woosley It is recommended that these donation requests be approved in accordance with the policies of the Board. [.ittCe 'Rock Centra{ J-f113f,, Schoo{ 1500 Soutli Park Street Litt[e 'Rock, .'A.rkansas 72202 Pfione 501-447-1400 :fax 501-447-1401 DATE: 11/24/2003 TO: FROM: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT A CY ROUSSEAU PRINCIPAL '1\\CtutJ/1.. x lUI_) ' SUBJECT: DO ATIO Paul and Corky Schroeder of 11706 Pleasant Ridge Drive Little Rock, AR 72223, very graciously donated a T.V., DVD player, 5 videos and 5 DVD's to our 504 Program. The estimated value is $400.00. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. NOV 2 5 t Gn3 ~ n 5 \"z' C\u0026gt; RI ~ 9l \"' Litt{e 'Rock Centra{ 3lfeli Sclioo{ 1500 Soutfi 'Park Street Litt{e 'Rock, .Jl..rkansas 72202 Phone 501-447-1400 ]'ax 501-447-1401 DATE: 11/5/2003 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT FROM: A CY ROUSSEAU, PRINCIPAL ~ SUBJECT: DONATION l(evin \u0026amp; Cathy Crass of 4521 Country Club Blvd. Little Rock, AR 72207, had Corky's Barbeque catered for the Central Tiger Football Team. The cost was $574.36. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. Litt{e 'Roci Centra{ J-figli Sclioo{ 1500 Soutfi 'Park Street Litt[e 'Rock, .'A.rkansas 72202 'Phone 501 -447-1400 :Fax 501-447-1401 DATE: 11/13/2003 TO: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREME T FROM: NANCY ROUSSEAU, PRI CIPAL _,,n : 6-A,,i~l,V\"--' SUBJECT: DO ATIO - - --------- Deborah Brooks of 8809 ancy Place Little Rock, AR 72204, graciously donated $250.00 to the baseball boosters. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. f.\u0026gt;., z ~ n ~ UI Litt{e 1Wck Centra{ 1ffali Sclioo{ 1500 Soutli 'Park Street Litt[e 'Rock, ..'Arkansas 72202 'Phone 501-447-1400 ]\"ax 501-447-1401 DATE: 11/17/2003 TO: FROM: DARRAL PARADIS, DIRECTOR OF PROCUREMENT A CY ROUSSEAU, PRI CIPAL itu~ SUBJECT: DO ATION Dr. Randal Hundley of 5515 Country Club Blvd. Little Rock, AR 72207, graciously donated a Hewlett Packard Laser Jet 4 printer valued at $300 to Central High School. It is my recommendation that this donation be accepted in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. MOV 1 3 2GD3 TO: ~\\(_\nROM: vr~ATE: SUBJECT: Darral Paradis, Director, Procurement Deptartment Theresa Ketcher, Principal of Forest Park School November 10, 2003 Donation An antique frenchbench valued at $1,915.00 has been donated to Forest Park School from Dr. Reid and Susan Henry, c/o Cobblestone and Vine, 5100 Kavanaugh Blvd., Little Rock, AR 72207. It is recommended that these donations be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. /pl  Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 2501 BARROW ROAD Date: To: From: Subject: PHONE 228-3000 December 4, 2003 Darral Paradis, Director LRSD Procurement Department J ()._ll-,1J'V Dr. Linda Brown, Principal 'f/' fl~ Parkview Arts/Science Magnet High School Golf Team Donation LI'ITLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72204 Steve and Debbie Woosley recently donated approximately $350.00 in shirts for our Parkview Golf Team, along with a combined fifty (50) hours plus of their time this fall . We, at Parkview, would like to say a very hearty Thank You to Mr. and Mrs. Woosley! Your support is appreciated more than we can express. It is recommended that this donation be approved in accordance with the policies of the Little Rock School District. DATE: TO: THROUGH: Little Rock School District Financial Services 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone: (501) 447-1086 Fax: (501) 447-1158 December 18, 2003 Little Rock School District Board of Directors Donald M. Stewart, Chief Financial Officer Morris L. Holmes, Interim Superintendent PREPARED BY: Mark D. Milhollen, Manager, Financial Services  Subject  Summary  Objectives  Expected Outcomes  Population/Location  Budget Amount/Source  Manager  Duration Financial Reports District funds are reported for the period ending November 30, 2003. To report the District's financial status monthly to the Board of Directors. The Board members will be informed of the District's current financial condition. NIA NIA Mark Milhollen, Manager of Financial Services NIA  Long Range/Continuation Financial reports will be submitted monthly to the Board.  Other Agencies Involved None  Expectations of District N/ A  Needed Staff NIA  Comments None  Recommendation Approval of the November 2003 financial reports. We recommend that the Board approve the financial reports as submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2002 AND 2003 APPROVED RECEIPTS % APPROVED RECEIPTS % 2002/03 11/30/02 COLLECTED 2003/04 11/30/03 COLLECTED REVENUE-LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 58,550,000 18,392,072 31.41% 57,547,800 20,927,350 36.37% DELINQUENT TAXES 8,000,000 4,534,278 56.68% 10,100,000 6,939,208 68.71% 40% PULLBACK 29,400,000 29,600,000 EXCESS TREASURER'S FEE 187,000 210,000 DEPOSITORY INTEREST 385,000 180,000 REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES 135,000 220,757 163.52% 150,000 MISCELLANEOUS AND RENTS 340,000 213,209 62.71% 380,000 220,826 58.11% INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 275,000 63,364 23.04% 200,000 56,591 28.30% ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 160,000 117,131 73.21% 240,000 118,641 49.43% TOTAL 97,432,000 23,540,812 24.16% 98,607,800 28,262,617 28.66% REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL 24,000 11,170 46.54% 21 ,000 11,594 55.21% TOTAL 24,000 11,170 46.54% 21,000 11,594 55.21% REVENUE - STATE SOURCES EQUALIZATION FUNDING 54,867,630 20,075,275 36.59% 53,226,139 19,354,959 36.36% REIMBURSEMENT STRS/HEAL TH 7,590,000 3,217,173 42.39% 8,300,000 2,024,292 24.39% VOCATIONAL 1,340,000 400,368 29.88% 1,400,000 430,364 30.74% HANDICAPPED CHILDREN 1,700,000 320 0.02% 1,675,000 93,470 5.58% EARLY CHILDHOOD 273,358 136,486 49.93% 273,358 135,094 49.42% TRANSPORTATION 3,685,226 1,226,542 33.28% 3,875,562 1,243,841 32.09% INCENTIVE FUNDS - M TO M 3,265,000 1,047,114 32.07% 3,900,000 736,844 18.89% ADULT EDUCATION 1,006,014 273,287 27.17% 920,337 152,263 16.54% POVERTY INDEX FUNDS 658,607 329,297 50.00% 560,545 267,486 47.72% EARLY LITERACY LEARNING 120,000 TAP PROGRAM 285,271 142,636 50.00% 285,245 142,623 50.00% AT RISK FUNDING 650,000 57,386 8.83% 360,000 TOTAL 75,441,106 26,905,883 35.66% 74,776,187 24,581,235 32.87% REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES TRANSFER FROM CAP PROJ FUND 620,000 770,000 TRANSFER FROM OTHER FUNDS 1,126,233 13,857 1.23% 1,350,000 18,519 1.37% TRANSFER FROM MAGNET FUND 1,664,438 1,632,430 TOTAL 3,410,671 13,857 0.41% 3,752,430 18,519 0.49% TOTAL REVENUE OPERATING 176,307,777 50,471,723 28.63% 177,157,418 52,873,965 29.85% REVENUE - OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 25,152,981 3,917,708 15.58% 24,075,790 4,554,092 18.92% DEDICATED M\u0026amp; 0 3,980,000 327,865 8.24% 4,000,000 725,821 18.15% MAGNET SCHOOLS 25,065,942 4,330,697 17.28% 24,689,351 3,440,020 13.93% TOTAL 54,198,923 8,576,270 15.82% 52,765,141 8,719,933 16.53% TOTAL REVENUE 230,506,700 59,047,992 25.62% 229,922,559 61,593,898 26.79% ~ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE FOR THE PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2002 AND 2003 ~ APPROVED EXPENDED % APPROVED EXPENDED % 2002/03 11 /30/02 EXPENDED 2003/04 11 /30/03 EXPENDED EXPENSES SALARIES 100,865,586 30,076,634 29.82% 100,684,982 29,777,981 29.58% BENEFITS 24,838,361 7,544,342 30.37% 26,483,772 7,729,21 1 29.18% PURCHASED SERVICES 19,795,774 6,875,951 34.73% 19,719,297 6,769,882 34.33% -MATERIALS \u0026amp; SUPPLIES 8,347,098 3,149,062 37.73% 8,185,459 4,033,046 49.27% CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,616,991 351 ,335 21 .73% 1,575,580 195,999 12.44% OTHER OBJECTS 8,508,680 176,244 2.07% 8,384,567 331 ,506 3.95% DEBT SERVICE 12,217,048 4,880,555 39.95% 12,098,342 4,699,176 38.84% TOTAL EXPENSES OPERATING 176,189,538 53,054,122 30.11% 177,131,999 53,536,801 30.22% EXPENSES-OTHER FEDERAL GRANTS 26,148,726 4,732,431 18.10% 26,056,193 5,641 ,014 21.65% DEDICATED M\u0026amp; 0 3,980,000 911 ,697 22.91% 4,000,000 1,869,745 46.74% MAGNET SCHOOLS 25,065,942 6,267,463 25.00% 24,689,351 6,278,304 25.43% TOTAL 55,194,668 11,911,591 21.58% 54,745,544 13,789,063 25.19% TOTAL EXPENSES 231,384,206 64,965,713 28.08% 231,877,543 67,325,865 29.04% INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE (877,506) (5,917,722) (1 ,954,984) (5,731,968) BEGINNING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; OED M\u0026amp; 0 1,645,440 1,645,440 3,558,580 3,558,580 OPERATING 8,557,652 8,557,652 9,026,855 9,026,855 ENDING FUND BALANCE FEDERAL, MAGNET \u0026amp; OED M\u0026amp; 0 649,695 (1,689,882) 1,578,177 (1 ,510,550) OPERATING 8,675,891 5,975,253 9,052,274 8,364,018 TOTAL 9,325,586 4,285,371 10,630,451 6,853,468 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2003 PROJECT BEG BALANCE INCOME TRANSFERS EXPENDITURES ENCUMBRANCES END BALANCE 07-01-03 2003-04 2003-04 2003-04 2003-04 11-30-03 $6,200,000 BOND ISSUE FAIR 33,282.90 33,282.90 MCCLELLAN 77,219.02 77,219.02 CONTINGENCY 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 110,501.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 110,501 .92 $136,268,560 BOND ISSUES ADMINISTRATION 32,802.37 50,000.00 49,671.00 5,921 .07 27,210.30 NEW WORK PROJECTS 18,614,545.40 190,056.00 7,275,957.86 9,194,811.49 2,333,832.05 SECURITY PROJECTS 42,273.97 2,153.87 40,120.10 LIGHTING PROJECTS 29,869.56 7,679.00 22,190.56 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 2,768,579.81 1,517,001 .00 1,915,041.38 717,774.23 1,652,765.20 RENOVATION PROJECTS 31,306,506.59 166,300.00 9,350,164.35 10,189,870.05 11,932,772.19 TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES 2,335,019.24 671 ,668.18 26,236.35 1,637,114.71 SUBTOTAL 55,129,596.94 0.00 1,923,357.00 19,272,335.64 20,134,613.19 17,646,005.11 REVENUES PROCEEDS-PROPERTY SALE 444,618.31 1,000.00 445,618.31 DUNBAR PROJECT 5,266.71 5,266.71 PROCEEDS-BOND SALES 22,074,599.23 (1,923,357.00) 20,151 ,242.23 PROCEEDS-QZAB SALE 1,293,820.97 1,293,820.97 INTEREST 7,288,776.89 574,191 .79 7,862,968.68 SUBTOTAL 31 ,107,082.11 575,191.79 (1,923,357.00) 0.00 0.00 29,758,916.90 GRAND TOTAL D ~~z lDQ iZ :iZ:illllZll l2.W! la 2Z2 ~~~ ~ ~!l U~ fil\ni lll ~z :il:i ~~\ni l!\ni LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT - BOND ISSUE PROJECT HISTORY - THRU THE PERIODENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2003 - - - - ~-----~----~---- -- - - ~---- ----------+- -PR- O- JEC_T_ - - - - -------- --- ALLOCAT=l~O~N~S---t--~E~x=p=EN~S~E~---1-~EX~P~E=N~s=E~+ - EXP_E_N-SE - EXPENSE ENCUMBERED PROJECT CATEGORIES THRU1-f-30-03 - -20-00-01 - - - 2-0-0-f.0_2_ --2002--03- T HRU 11-30-03 THRU 11-30-03 ~ UBTOTAL 1------------l------+---- -- ADM-1-NI_S_T_R-AT-I_O_N_ _________-  ,_-___6_ 36_,84_6_.5_5 - 889,~72.32 _(485,325.77) -14-9,597.63 - 49,671 .00 - 5,921 .07 609,636.25 NEW WORK PROJECTS 35,509, 116.80-~ 443,467.00 4,589,606.29 ----:,T,671 ,442.11 7,275,957.86 9,194,81 1.49 33,175,284.75 ENDING ALLOCATION 11-30-0-3 - 27,210.30 2 ,333,832J'l5 SECURITY PROJECTS 265,814.17 113,930.47 - - 109,609.73 - 2,153.87 - --- - 225,694.07 - --- 40,120.10 -- - - -- -- LIGHTING PROJECTS 4,883,405.13 2,641 ,482.13 1,832,392.06 379,661 .38 7,679.00 0.00 4,861,214.57 MAINTENANCE \u0026amp; REPAIR 12,750,611.51 791,385.63 4,218,294.40 3,455,350.67 1,915,041 .38 - ~ 7,774.23 11 ,09 7,846.31 RENOVATION PROJECTS 51,655,707.04 397,615.34 ~ 045.21 15,666,239.90 9,350,164.35 10,189,870.05 - 39,722,934.85 TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES -----.,1,735,611 .78 575,016.53 ~ 4,325,20Ll0 - 4,S0~ !W 671 ,668.18 26,236.35 10,098,497.07 - -- - --+----- - UNALLOCATED PROCEEDS 21,445,063.20 - ------ +----- - - 22,190.56 1,652,765.20 11,932,772.19 1,63i\nTT4.71 21,445,063.20 TOTAL 138,882, 17678 e--- 5,852,669.42 18,708,823.32 35,822,666.30 19,272,335.64 20,134,613.19 9 9,791 ,107.87 ~.091 ,068.31 ------,1----- -- - ----------+-------1-----+-------t- -- -- -i-- -- 1-----------+------ +-------+--- - ------------- ----+------+---- - - -----------+--------+---- 1-----------+-- .lN3WN'!lnorov x S9Nl'!IV3H 'Xl S\u0026gt;l'!IVW3'!1 9NIS01:l 'Ill/\\ ------- - - -----+------- -- ---- - - -- LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS BY FUND FOR THE PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2003 Fund Purchase Maturity Institution Interest Rate Type 1 Principal Date Date i I Operating I 06-09-03 12-08-03 Regions 1.090% Money Market 20,000.00 Operating 07-19-03 01-19-04 Regions 0.945% Money Market 20,000.00 Operating 04-08-03 12-05-03 Pulaski 1.290% Money Market 10,000.00 Operating 11-28-03 TFN Bank of America 0.880% Repo 10,785,000.00 Total I 10,835,000.00 I I I Activity Fund I 11-17-03 TFN Bank of America 0.850% Repo 1,250,000.00 Total I 1,250,000.00 i I I Bond Account 09-08-03 03-08-04 Regions 1.094% CD 400,000.00 Capital Projects Fund 01-17-03 01-16-04 I Metropolitan 1.930% CD I 1,000,934.31 Capital Projects Fund 01-17-03 01-16-04 Bank of the Ozarks 2.250% CD 5,116,598.09 Capital Projects Fund 10-15-03 02-13-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.250% CD ' 5,000,000.00 Capital Projects Fund 01-29-03 01-29-04 Bancorp South 2.000% CD 2,058,896.90 Capital Projects Fund 01-17-03 01-16-04 I Superior 2.250% CD j 2,500,000.00 Capital Projects Fund 11-18-03 04-15-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.300% CD 6,000,000.00 t ~ Capital Projects Fund 05-15-03 08-16-04 USBANK 1.420% CD 11,000,000.00 I + I Capital Projects Fund 01-22-03 01-16-04 Bank of America 1.240% Treasury Bills 5,299,646.43  Capital Projects Fund 05-15-03 05-14-04 Bank of the Ozarks 1.360% CD 9,000,000.00  Capital Projects Fund 08-01-03 12-01-03 Bank of the Ozarks I 1.220% CD 3,048,218.28 Capital Projects Fund 09-15-03 03-15-04 I Bank of the Ozarks 1.430% I CD t 10,221,001 .82 I I I Capital Projects Fund 11-25-03 TFN Bank of America 0.800% Repo 7,500,000.00 Total I 68,145,295.83 Deseg Plan Scholarship 06-11-03 12-04-03 Bank of America 0.920% Treasury Bills 664,995.48 Total I 664,995.48 I Rockefeller Scholarship 06-24-03 01-15-04 Bank of America 0.760% Treasury Bills 250,909.40 Total I I I 250,909.40 Risk Management Loss Fund j i . 11-17-03 TFN Bank of America 0.700% I Repo 500,000.00 t 500,000.00\nThis project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n \n\n  \n\n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n\n\n   \n\n  \n\n \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n   \n\n \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n   \n\n\n\n  \n\n\n\n "}],"pages":{"current_page":330,"next_page":331,"prev_page":329,"total_pages":6766,"limit_value":12,"offset_value":3948,"total_count":81191,"first_page?":false,"last_page?":false},"facets":[{"name":"educator_resource_mediums_sms","items":[{"value":"lesson plans","hits":319},{"value":"teaching guides","hits":53},{"value":"timelines (chronologies)","hits":43},{"value":"online exhibitions","hits":38},{"value":"bibliographies","hits":15},{"value":"study guides","hits":11},{"value":"annotated bibliographies","hits":9},{"value":"learning modules","hits":6},{"value":"worksheets","hits":6},{"value":"slide shows","hits":4},{"value":"quizzes","hits":1}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"type_facet","items":[{"value":"Text","hits":40200},{"value":"StillImage","hits":35114},{"value":"MovingImage","hits":4552},{"value":"Sound","hits":3248},{"value":"Collection","hits":41},{"value":"InteractiveResource","hits":25}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":16,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"creator_facet","items":[{"value":"Peppler, Jim","hits":4965},{"value":"Phay, John E.","hits":4712},{"value":"University of Mississippi. Bureau of Educational Research","hits":4707},{"value":"Baldowski, Clifford H., 1917-1999","hits":2599},{"value":"Mississippi State Sovereignty Commission","hits":2255},{"value":"Thurmond, Strom, 1902-2003","hits":2077},{"value":"WSB-TV (Television station : Atlanta, Ga.)","hits":1475},{"value":"Newman, I. DeQuincey (Isaiah DeQuincey), 1911-1985","hits":1003},{"value":"The State Media Company (Columbia, S.C.)","hits":926},{"value":"Atlanta Journal-Constitution","hits":844},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":778}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_facet","items":[{"value":"African Americans--Civil rights","hits":9441},{"value":"Civil rights","hits":8347},{"value":"African Americans","hits":5895},{"value":"Mississippi--Race relations","hits":5750},{"value":"Race relations","hits":5607},{"value":"Education, Secondary","hits":5083},{"value":"Education, Elementary","hits":4729},{"value":"Segregation in education--Mississippi","hits":4727},{"value":"Education--Pictorial works","hits":4707},{"value":"Civil rights demonstrations","hits":4436},{"value":"Civil rights workers","hits":3530}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"subject_personal_facet","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966--Correspondence","hits":1888},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1809},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1709},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1312},{"value":"Baker, Augusta, 1911-1998","hits":1282},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1071},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":858},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":814},{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":719},{"value":"Mizell, M. Hayes","hits":674},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":626}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"name_authoritative_sms","items":[{"value":"Smith, Lillian (Lillian Eugenia), 1897-1966","hits":2598},{"value":"King, Martin Luther, Jr., 1929-1968","hits":1909},{"value":"Meredith, James, 1933-","hits":1704},{"value":"Herrera, John J.","hits":1331},{"value":"Parks, Rosa, 1913-2005","hits":1070},{"value":"Jordan, Barbara, 1936-1996","hits":856},{"value":"Young, Andrew, 1932-","hits":806},{"value":"Silver, James W. (James Wesley), 1907-1988","hits":625},{"value":"Connor, Eugene, 1897-1973","hits":605},{"value":"Snelling, Paula","hits":580},{"value":"Williams, Hosea, 1926-2000","hits":431}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"event_title_sms","items":[{"value":"Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Prize","hits":1763},{"value":"Ole Miss Integration","hits":1670},{"value":"Housing Act of 1961","hits":965},{"value":"Little Rock Central High School Integration","hits":704},{"value":"Memphis Sanitation Workers Strike","hits":366},{"value":"Selma-Montgomery March","hits":337},{"value":"Freedom Summer","hits":306},{"value":"Freedom Rides","hits":214},{"value":"Poor People's Campaign","hits":180},{"value":"University of Georgia Integration","hits":173},{"value":"University of Alabama Integration","hits":140}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"location_facet","items":[{"value":"United States, 39.76, -98.5","hits":17820},{"value":"United States, Georgia, Fulton County, Atlanta, 33.749, -84.38798","hits":5428},{"value":"United States, Alabama, Montgomery County, Montgomery, 32.36681, -86.29997","hits":5151},{"value":"United States, Georgia, 32.75042, -83.50018","hits":4862},{"value":"United States, South Carolina, 34.00043, -81.00009","hits":4610},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, 34.75037, -92.50044","hits":4177},{"value":"United States, Alabama, 32.75041, -86.75026","hits":3943},{"value":"United States, Mississippi, 32.75041, -89.75036","hits":2910},{"value":"United States, Tennessee, Shelby County, Memphis, 35.14953, -90.04898","hits":2579},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, 34.76993, -92.3118","hits":2430},{"value":"United States, Arkansas, Pulaski County, Little Rock, 34.74648, -92.28959","hits":2387}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"us_states_facet","items":[{"value":"Georgia","hits":12843},{"value":"Alabama","hits":11307},{"value":"Mississippi","hits":10219},{"value":"South Carolina","hits":8503},{"value":"Arkansas","hits":4583},{"value":"Texas","hits":4399},{"value":"Tennessee","hits":3770},{"value":"Florida","hits":2601},{"value":"Ohio","hits":2391},{"value":"North Carolina","hits":1893},{"value":"New York","hits":1667}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"year_facet","items":[{"value":"1966","hits":10514},{"value":"1963","hits":10193},{"value":"1965","hits":10119},{"value":"1956","hits":9832},{"value":"1955","hits":9611},{"value":"1964","hits":9268},{"value":"1968","hits":9243},{"value":"1962","hits":9152},{"value":"1967","hits":8771},{"value":"1957","hits":8460},{"value":"1958","hits":8242},{"value":"1961","hits":8241},{"value":"1959","hits":8046},{"value":"1960","hits":7940},{"value":"1954","hits":7239},{"value":"1969","hits":7235},{"value":"1950","hits":7117},{"value":"1953","hits":6968},{"value":"1970","hits":6743},{"value":"1971","hits":6337},{"value":"1977","hits":6280},{"value":"1952","hits":6161},{"value":"1972","hits":6144},{"value":"1951","hits":6045},{"value":"1975","hits":5806},{"value":"1976","hits":5771},{"value":"1974","hits":5729},{"value":"1973","hits":5591},{"value":"1979","hits":5329},{"value":"1978","hits":5318},{"value":"1980","hits":5279},{"value":"1995","hits":4829},{"value":"1981","hits":4724},{"value":"1994","hits":4654},{"value":"1948","hits":4596},{"value":"1949","hits":4571},{"value":"1996","hits":4486},{"value":"1982","hits":4330},{"value":"1947","hits":4316},{"value":"1985","hits":4226},{"value":"1998","hits":4225},{"value":"1997","hits":4202},{"value":"1983","hits":4174},{"value":"1984","hits":4065},{"value":"1946","hits":4046},{"value":"1999","hits":4018},{"value":"1945","hits":4017},{"value":"1990","hits":3937},{"value":"1986","hits":3919},{"value":"1943","hits":3899},{"value":"1944","hits":3895},{"value":"1942","hits":3867},{"value":"2000","hits":3808},{"value":"2001","hits":3790},{"value":"1940","hits":3764},{"value":"1941","hits":3757},{"value":"1987","hits":3657},{"value":"2002","hits":3538},{"value":"1991","hits":3507},{"value":"1936","hits":3506},{"value":"1939","hits":3500},{"value":"1938","hits":3465},{"value":"1937","hits":3449},{"value":"1992","hits":3444},{"value":"1993","hits":3422},{"value":"2003","hits":3403},{"value":"1930","hits":3377},{"value":"1989","hits":3355},{"value":"1935","hits":3306},{"value":"1933","hits":3270},{"value":"1934","hits":3270},{"value":"1988","hits":3269},{"value":"1932","hits":3254},{"value":"1931","hits":3239},{"value":"2005","hits":3057},{"value":"2004","hits":2909},{"value":"1929","hits":2789},{"value":"2006","hits":2774},{"value":"1928","hits":2271},{"value":"1921","hits":2123},{"value":"1925","hits":2039},{"value":"1927","hits":2025},{"value":"1924","hits":2011},{"value":"1926","hits":2009},{"value":"1920","hits":1975},{"value":"1923","hits":1954},{"value":"1922","hits":1928},{"value":"2016","hits":1925},{"value":"2007","hits":1629},{"value":"2008","hits":1578},{"value":"2011","hits":1575},{"value":"2019","hits":1537},{"value":"1919","hits":1532},{"value":"2009","hits":1532},{"value":"1918","hits":1530},{"value":"2015","hits":1527},{"value":"2013","hits":1518},{"value":"2010","hits":1515},{"value":"2014","hits":1481},{"value":"2012","hits":1467}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null},"min":"0193","max":"2035","count":500952,"missing":56},{"name":"medium_facet","items":[{"value":"photographs","hits":10708},{"value":"correspondence","hits":9437},{"value":"black-and-white photographs","hits":7678},{"value":"negatives (photographs)","hits":7513},{"value":"documents (object genre)","hits":4462},{"value":"letters (correspondence)","hits":3623},{"value":"oral histories (literary works)","hits":3607},{"value":"black-and-white negatives","hits":2740},{"value":"editorial cartoons","hits":2620},{"value":"newspapers","hits":1955},{"value":"manuscripts (documents)","hits":1692}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"rights_facet","items":[{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/","hits":41178},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-EDU/1.0/","hits":17554},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/UND/1.0/","hits":8828},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/","hits":6864},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/","hits":2186},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/","hits":1778},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-CR/1.0/","hits":1115},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/","hits":197},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NKC/1.0/","hits":60},{"value":"http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-RUU/1.0/","hits":51},{"value":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/","hits":27}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"collection_titles_sms","items":[{"value":"Jim Peppler Southern Courier Photograph Collection","hits":4956},{"value":"John E. Phay Collection ","hits":4706},{"value":"John J. Herrera Papers","hits":3288},{"value":"Baldy Editorial Cartoons, 1946-1982, 1997: Clifford H. Baldowski Editorial Cartoons at the Richard B. Russell Library.","hits":2607},{"value":"Sovereignty Commission Online","hits":2335},{"value":"Strom Thurmond Collection, Mss 100","hits":2068},{"value":"Alabama Media Group Collection","hits":2067},{"value":"Black Trailblazers, Leaders, Activists, and Intellectuals in Cleveland","hits":2033},{"value":"Rosa Parks Papers","hits":1948},{"value":"Isaiah DeQuincey Newman, (1911-1985), Papers, 1929-2003","hits":1904},{"value":"Lillian Eugenia Smith Papers (circa 1920-1980)","hits":1887}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"provenance_facet","items":[{"value":"John Davis Williams Library. Department of Archives and Special Collections","hits":8885},{"value":"Alabama. Department of Archives and History","hits":8146},{"value":"Atlanta University Center Robert W. Woodruff Library","hits":4102},{"value":"South Caroliniana Library","hits":4024},{"value":"University of North Texas. Libraries","hits":3854},{"value":"Hargrett Library","hits":3292},{"value":"University of South Carolina. Libraries","hits":3212},{"value":"Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies","hits":2874},{"value":"Mississippi. Department of Archives and History","hits":2825},{"value":"Butler Center for Arkansas Studies","hits":2633},{"value":"Rhodes College","hits":2264}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":11,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"class_name","items":[{"value":"Item","hits":80736},{"value":"Collection","hits":455}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}},{"name":"educator_resource_b","items":[{"value":"false","hits":80994},{"value":"true","hits":197}],"options":{"sort":"count","limit":100,"offset":0,"prefix":null}}]}}